Wed, Mar 16, 2011·Rogers Arena, Vancouver
Colorado Avalanche 2, Vancouver Canucks 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Vancouver Canucks win this game 73% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COL | 28 | 05 | 016 | 229 |
| VAN | 09 | 115 | 316 | 440 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 11:20COLErik JohnsonPPAssists: John-Michael Liles, David Jones · Slap, 0.02 xG1–0
- P1 12:47COLMatt DucheneAssists: Mark Olver, Ryan O'Byrne · Wrist, 0.18 xG2–0
- P2 6:37VANMaxim LapierreAssists: Chris Higgins, Keith Ballard · Wrist, 0.14 xG2–1
- P3 9:32VANAlexandre BurrowsAssists: Daniel Sedin, Dan Hamhuis · Wrist, 0.13 xG2–2
- P3 11:50VANHenrik SedinGWGAssists: Daniel Sedin, Alexandre Burrows · Wrist, 0.10 xG2–3
- P3 18:46VANHenrik SedinENUnassisted · Wrist, 0.45 xG2–4
Penalties (2)
- P1 10:10VANSami Salo: Interference2 min · PPG
- P3 13:37COLRyan Wilson: Tripping2 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 20:00Stastny won the faceoff against Malhotra
- 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.
Colorado Avalanche
Forward lines
- Winnik – Olver – Duchene12:35
xG 0.61–0.65 (48%)attempts 13–17goals 1–1
- Jones – Stastny – O'Reilly14:27
xG 0.33–0.37 (47%)attempts 7–10goals 0–0
- McClement – Porter – McLeod10:17
xG 0.05–0.78 (6%)attempts 3–21goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestO'Byrne – Wilson2:43
xG 0.34–0.08 (82%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Liles – Johnson2:41
xG 0.20–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–0goals 1–0
- Liles – O'Byrne11:58
xG 0.51–0.59 (46%)attempts 11–17goals 0–0
Vancouver Canucks
Forward lines
- bestSedin – Sedin – Burrows16:17
xG 0.91–0.34 (73%)attempts 21–8goals 2–0
- Samuelsson – Kesler – Raymond12:01
xG 0.50–0.23 (68%)attempts 18–5goals 0–0
- Higgins – Tambellini – Lapierre9:16
xG 0.30–0.10 (76%)attempts 12–5goals 1–0
- Samuelsson – Higgins – Kesler2:46
xG 0.11–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHamhuis – Ehrhoff21:06
xG 1.46–0.66 (69%)attempts 34–14goals 2–0
- Ballard – Tanev13:21
xG 0.70–0.36 (66%)attempts 16–9goals 1–0
- Salo – Rome17:53
xG 0.41–0.61 (41%)attempts 20–11goals 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.
VAN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line VAN is favoured, below it COL. 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, Vancouver Canucks win this game 73% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (VAN − COL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).