Wed, Nov 17, 2010·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
Vancouver Canucks 1, Pittsburgh Penguins 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 70% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VAN | 06 | 112 | 012 | 130 |
| PIT | 111 | 29 | 09 | 329 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 16:43PITSidney CrosbyAssists: Max Talbot, Brooks Orpik · Snap, 0.16 xG0–1
- P2 5:43PITMax TalbotSHGWGAssists: Matt Cooke · Backhand, 0.10 xG0–2
- P2 9:04PITArron AshamAssists: Mike Rupp, Paul Martin · Wrist, 0.16 xG0–3
- P2 9:38VANDan HamhuisAssists: Henrik Sedin, Daniel Sedin · Wrist, 0.10 xG1–3
Penalties (9)
- P1 2:15VANKevin Bieksa: Fighting5 min
- P1 2:15PITCraig Adams: Fighting5 min
- P1 14:36PITSidney Crosby: Holding2 min
- P2 2:43PITMike Rupp: Holding2 min
- P2 5:06PITMike Rupp: Boarding2 min
- P2 12:07VANKeith Ballard: Hooking2 min
- P2 16:08PITPascal Dupuis: Tripping2 min
- P3 14:57PITSidney Crosby: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P3 15:42VANHenrik Sedin: Holding2 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 20:00Malhotra won the faceoff against Letestu
- 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.
Vancouver Canucks
Forward lines
- bestBurrows – Kesler – Raymond5:53
xG 0.30–0.19 (62%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Samuelsson – Sedin – Sedin6:41
xG 0.13–0.17 (42%)attempts 11–4goals 0–0
- Sedin – Sedin – Burrows7:09
xG 0.14–0.28 (34%)attempts 9–4goals 1–0
- Glass – Rypien – Bliznak3:35
xG 0.00–0.15 (0%)attempts 0–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Bieksa – Edler11:40
xG 0.40–0.35 (53%)attempts 16–11goals 0–0
- Hamhuis – Ballard3:10
xG 0.12–0.08 (58%)attempts 3–2goals 1–0
- Ehrhoff – Alberts2:00
xG 0.06–0.14 (29%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestDupuis – Kunitz – Crosby10:42
xG 0.50–0.16 (75%)attempts 10–11goals 0–0
- Asham – Cooke – Malkin7:17
xG 0.29–0.19 (61%)attempts 7–7goals 0–1
- Kennedy – Conner – Letestu7:29
xG 0.11–0.08 (59%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Adams – Rupp – Talbot4:09
xG 0.03–0.01 (69%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMartin – Michalek14:22
xG 0.64–0.26 (71%)attempts 18–10goals 1–0
- Engelland – Goligoski12:27
xG 0.50–0.15 (77%)attempts 16–9goals 0–0
- Orpik – Michalek2:34
xG 0.16–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–1goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it VAN. 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 70% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − VAN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).