Tue, Feb 22, 2011·Scotiabank Saddledome, Calgary
Boston Bruins 3, Calgary Flames 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Boston Bruins win this game 66% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOS | 17 | 010 | 212 | 329 |
| CGY | 013 | 09 | 17 | 129 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 0:59BOSMilan LucicAssists: David Krejci, Adam McQuaid · Deflected, 0.08 xG1–0
- P3 5:55BOSBrad MarchandGWGAssists: Patrice Bergeron, Andrew Ference · Wrist, 0.03 xG2–0
- P3 17:27CGYCurtis GlencrossPPAssists: Jarome Iginla, Alex Tanguay · Wrist, 0.14 xG2–1
- P3 19:13BOSMilan LucicENAssists: David Krejci, Mark Recchi · Wrist, 0.68 xG3–1
Penalties (3)
- P1 2:30BOSMichael Ryder: Hooking2 min
- P2 17:34CGYCurtis Glencross: High sticking double minor4 min
- P3 16:56BOSPatrice Bergeron: Slashing2 min · PPG
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 20:00Bergeron won the faceoff against Morrison
- 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.
Boston Bruins
Forward lines
- bestThornton – Campbell – Seguin9:54
xG 0.22–0.13 (63%)attempts 12–8goals 0–0
- Ryder – Kelly – Peverley11:39
xG 0.22–0.21 (52%)attempts 8–12goals 0–0
- Horton – Krejci – Lucic12:22
xG 0.32–0.33 (50%)attempts 10–12goals 1–0
- Recchi – Bergeron – Marchand11:28
xG 0.21–0.51 (29%)attempts 9–20goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestChara – McQuaid6:17
xG 0.23–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–2goals 1–0
- Ference – McQuaid9:44
xG 0.36–0.19 (65%)attempts 11–13goals 1–0
- Chara – Boychuk11:05
xG 0.21–0.11 (65%)attempts 11–7goals 0–0
Calgary Flames
Forward lines
- bestKostopoulos – Hagman – Backlund4:53
xG 0.32–0.01 (96%)attempts 9–3goals 0–0
- Morrison – Iginla – Tanguay13:11
xG 0.26–0.20 (56%)attempts 15–7goals 0–0
- Kostopoulos – Jackman – Moss4:53
xG 0.11–0.08 (58%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
- Jokinen – Moss – Glencross5:50
xG 0.14–0.15 (48%)attempts 8–6goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestSarich – Giordano15:19
xG 0.38–0.18 (68%)attempts 15–12goals 0–0
- Regehr – Bouwmeester13:09
xG 0.26–0.19 (58%)attempts 17–7goals 0–1
- Staios – Babchuk10:29
xG 0.35–0.35 (50%)attempts 13–14goals 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.
CGY's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CGY is favoured, below it BOS. 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, Boston Bruins win this game 66% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CGY − BOS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).