Fri, Dec 31, 2010·Honda Center, Anaheim
Philadelphia Flyers 2, Anaheim Ducks 5
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 51% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PHI | 011 | 110 | 116 | 237 |
| ANA | 17 | 29 | 211 | 527 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:10ANAJason BlakeAssists: Toni Lydman, Jonas Hiller · Backhand, 0.08 xG0–1
- P2 3:58ANALubomir VisnovskyAssists: Teemu Selanne, Saku Koivu · Wrist, 0.11 xG0–2
- P2 5:58ANAJason BlakePPGWGAssists: Joffrey Lupul, Saku Koivu · Wrist, 0.37 xG0–3
- P2 8:15PHIAndreas NodlAssists: Matt Carle, Jeff Carter · Slap, 0.05 xG1–3
- P3 3:30PHIJeff CarterUnassisted · Wrist, 0.06 xG2–3
- P3 5:40ANABobby RyanAssists: Toni Lydman, Corey Perry · Wrist, 0.05 xG2–4
- P3 16:50ANALubomir VisnovskyAssists: Teemu Selanne, Brandon McMillan · Wrist, 0.08 xG2–5
Penalties (6)
- P1 12:29PHIDaniel Carcillo: Fighting5 min
- P1 12:29ANAKyle Chipchura: Fighting5 min
- P1 14:43ANAJoffrey Lupul: Slashing2 min
- P2 4:48PHINikolay Zherdev: High sticking2 min · PPG
- P2 11:05ANAMatt Beleskey: Hooking2 min
- P2 18:30PHIScott Hartnell: Boarding2 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 20:00Carter won the faceoff against Ryan
- 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.
Philadelphia Flyers
Forward lines
- bestHartnell – Zherdev – Giroux6:30
xG 0.24–0.04 (84%)attempts 8–4goals 0–0
- Betts – Carcillo – Powe6:34
xG 0.30–0.11 (73%)attempts 8–2goals 0–0
- Brière – Hartnell – Giroux6:03
xG 0.32–0.34 (48%)attempts 7–5goals 0–1
- Richards – Powe – van Riemsdyk2:37
xG 0.04–0.07 (36%)attempts 1–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCarle – Meszaros16:46
xG 1.10–0.50 (69%)attempts 24–11goals 2–1
- O'Donnell – Bartulis9:59
xG 0.51–0.13 (80%)attempts 13–5goals 0–1
- O'Donnell – Coburn2:02
xG 0.06–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestMarchant – Lupul – McMillan11:39
xG 0.60–0.35 (63%)attempts 10–12goals 0–0
- Selanne – Koivu – Blake13:20
xG 0.86–0.61 (58%)attempts 17–11goals 2–0
- Parros – Chipchura – Bonino4:41
xG 0.11–0.05 (68%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0
- Perry – Ryan – Beleskey10:22
xG 0.30–0.52 (37%)attempts 7–12goals 1–2
Defence pairs
- bestLydman – Visnovsky16:32
xG 1.33–1.00 (57%)attempts 23–20goals 4–1
- Sutton – Sbisa11:10
xG 0.54–0.28 (66%)attempts 6–13goals 0–1
- Lilja – Fowler19:25
xG 0.25–0.87 (22%)attempts 9–20goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it PHI. 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 51% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − PHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).