Thu, Jan 6, 2011·HP Pavilion at San Jose, San Jose
Buffalo Sabres 3, San Jose Sharks 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 56% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 212 | 15 | 05 | 322 |
| SJS | 012 | 013 | 011 | 036 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:43BUFLuke AdamGWGAssists: Cody McCormick, Rob Niedermayer · Backhand, 0.33 xG1–0
- P1 16:36BUFJochen HechtAssists: Tyler Ennis · Wrist, 0.06 xG2–0
- P2 3:31BUFThomas VanekPPAssists: Drew Stafford, Jordan Leopold · Wrist, 0.21 xG3–0
Penalties (11)
- P1 1:50BUFShaone Morrisonn: Interference2 min
- P1 5:11SJSTorrey Mitchell: Tripping2 min
- P1 7:00SJSJoe Thornton: Hooking2 min
- P1 7:52BUFDrew Stafford: Hooking2 min
- P1 10:20SJSRyane Clowe: Fighting5 min
- P1 10:20BUFMike Weber: Fighting5 min
- P1 18:04BUFSteve Montador: High sticking2 min
- P1 18:20SJSDan Boyle: Holding the stick2 min
- P2 2:47SJSDan Boyle: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P2 16:38BUFJochen Hecht: Interference2 min
- P3 3:09BUFMike Grier: Delaying game puck over glass2 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 20:00Thornton won the faceoff against Connolly
- 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.
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestConnolly – Pominville – Vanek11:28
xG 0.47–0.29 (62%)attempts 9–11goals 0–0
- Niedermayer – Grier – Gaustad6:55
xG 0.20–0.14 (59%)attempts 3–8goals 0–0
- Niedermayer – McCormick – Adam6:25
xG 0.38–0.49 (44%)attempts 3–9goals 1–0
- Hecht – Stafford – Ennis11:06
xG 0.28–0.45 (38%)attempts 7–19goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- Morrisonn – Weber12:32
xG 0.07–0.10 (42%)attempts 4–11goals 0–0
- Leopold – Montador16:56
xG 0.68–0.79 (46%)attempts 10–24goals 0–0
- Sekera – Myers10:55
xG 0.17–0.51 (25%)attempts 5–15goals 1–0
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestClowe – Ferriero – Couture9:29
xG 0.37–0.08 (82%)attempts 12–3goals 0–0
- Heatley – Mitchell – McGinn6:27
xG 0.30–0.01 (96%)attempts 9–1goals 0–0
- Thornton – Marleau – Heatley3:24
xG 0.23–0.00 (100%)attempts 10–0goals 0–0
- Thornton – Marleau – Setoguchi8:40
xG 0.12–0.37 (24%)attempts 9–5goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestWallin – Demers9:23
xG 0.51–0.08 (86%)attempts 7–4goals 0–1
- Boyle – Wallin3:12
xG 0.24–0.08 (75%)attempts 7–2goals 0–0
- Huskins – Vlasic10:11
xG 0.10–0.18 (37%)attempts 10–3goals 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.
SJS's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line SJS is favoured, below it BUF. 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 56% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (SJS − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).