Thu, Feb 10, 2011·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
Los Angeles Kings 1, Pittsburgh Penguins 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Los Angeles Kings win this game 60% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LAK | 113 | 02 | 014 | 04 | 133 |
| PIT | 15 | 011 | 08 | 12 | 226 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 6:53PITBrett SterlingAssists: Dustin Jeffrey, Nick Johnson · Snap, 0.11 xG0–1
- P1 17:17LAKJarret StollAssists: Ryan Smyth, Justin Williams · Wrist, 0.10 xG1–1
- OT 4:41PITJordan StaalGWGAssists: Pascal Dupuis · Wrist, 0.08 xG1–2
Penalties (9)
- P1 4:21PITAlex Goligoski: Interference2 min
- P1 11:22PITPascal Dupuis: Slashing2 min
- P2 1:30LAKDustin Brown: Cross checking2 min
- P2 7:38LAKKevin Westgarth: Fighting5 min
- P2 7:38PITDeryk Engelland: Fighting5 min
- P2 13:12LAKWayne Simmonds: Fighting5 min
- P2 13:12PITRyan Craig: Fighting5 min
- P2 17:14LAKWillie Mitchell: Slashing2 min
- P3 1:57PITBrooks Orpik: 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 20:00Talbot won the faceoff against Stoll
- 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.
Los Angeles Kings
Forward lines
- bestSmyth – Williams – Stoll12:48
xG 0.51–0.28 (64%)attempts 14–7goals 1–0
- Handzus – Simmonds – Clifford7:37
xG 0.20–0.05 (81%)attempts 6–7goals 0–0
- Brown – Kopitar – Loktionov11:54
xG 0.12–0.19 (37%)attempts 8–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMitchell – Doughty18:09
xG 0.57–0.16 (78%)attempts 25–13goals 1–0
- Greene – Martinez7:14
xG 0.19–0.07 (74%)attempts 8–7goals 0–0
- Mitchell – Greene2:09
xG 0.06–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestSterling – Johnson – Staal2:30
xG 0.16–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Dupuis – Kennedy – Staal8:45
xG 0.23–0.14 (62%)attempts 12–9goals 0–0
- Adams – Craig – Vitale4:22
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 0–0goals 0–0
- Rupp – Vitale – Conner2:44
xG 0.00–0.02 (0%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestGoligoski – Letang2:56
xG 0.17–0.08 (69%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Orpik – Letang12:59
xG 0.40–0.34 (54%)attempts 10–14goals 0–0
- Martin – Michalek13:38
xG 0.31–0.28 (53%)attempts 9–14goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it LAK. 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, Los Angeles Kings win this game 60% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − LAK), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).