Sun, Mar 27, 2011·Wells Fargo Center, Philadelphia
Boston Bruins 2, Philadelphia Flyers 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Boston Bruins win this game 71% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOS | 010 | 114 | 112 | 236 |
| PHI | 110 | 07 | 011 | 128 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 4:45PHIKris VersteegAssists: Mike Richards, James van Riemsdyk · Tip-in, 0.05 xG0–1
- P2 7:40BOSNathan HortonPPAssists: Tomas Kaberle, David Krejci · Wrist, 0.48 xG1–1
- P3 16:17BOSBrad MarchandPPGWGAssists: Dennis Seidenberg, Mark Recchi · Wrist, 0.56 xG2–1
Penalties (4)
- P1 9:57PHIKris Versteeg: Holding2 min
- P1 18:22BOSPatrice Bergeron: Hooking2 min
- P2 7:36PHIBlair Betts: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P3 15:33PHIMike Richards: High sticking2 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 20:00Brière won the faceoff against Bergeron
- 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 – Paille9:35
xG 0.51–0.19 (73%)attempts 14–6goals 0–0
- Recchi – Bergeron – Marchand13:41
xG 0.47–0.27 (63%)attempts 15–7goals 0–0
- Horton – Krejci – Lucic14:13
xG 0.50–0.59 (46%)attempts 15–8goals 0–0
- Kelly – Peverley – Seguin10:13
xG 0.31–0.41 (43%)attempts 9–14goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestChara – Boychuk17:18
xG 0.57–0.32 (64%)attempts 22–11goals 0–0
- Ference – McQuaid13:14
xG 0.34–0.23 (60%)attempts 12–9goals 0–1
- Kaberle – Seidenberg18:33
xG 0.98–1.07 (48%)attempts 21–20goals 0–0
Philadelphia Flyers
Forward lines
- bestCarter – Giroux – Nodl12:43
xG 0.53–0.41 (56%)attempts 11–14goals 0–0
- Richards – Versteeg – van Riemsdyk12:19
xG 0.27–0.36 (42%)attempts 11–10goals 1–0
- Betts – Carcillo – Powe4:57
xG 0.06–0.20 (25%)attempts 3–7goals 0–0
- Brière – Hartnell – Leino11:30
xG 0.23–0.44 (35%)attempts 9–13goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestO'Donnell – Meszaros12:26
xG 0.63–0.38 (62%)attempts 12–14goals 0–0
- Coburn – Carle2:06
xG 0.08–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Carle – Meszaros9:29
xG 0.46–0.46 (50%)attempts 6–11goals 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.
PHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PHI 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 71% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PHI − BOS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).