Thu, Mar 31, 2011·St. Pete Times Forum, Tampa
Pittsburgh Penguins 1, Tampa Bay Lightning 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 61% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | 06 | 014 | 117 | 137 |
| TBL | 28 | 06 | 010 | 224 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 4:51TBLSteve DownieAssists: Simon Gagne, Steven Stamkos · Backhand, 0.26 xG0–1
- P1 10:13TBLMartin St. LouisGWGAssists: Vincent Lecavalier, Victor Hedman · Wrist, 0.10 xG0–2
- P3 4:31PITMike RuppAssists: Alex Kovalev · Wrist, 0.02 xG1–2
Penalties (13)
- P1 0:39PITPaul Martin: Interference2 min
- P1 11:21TBLPavel Kubina: Hooking2 min
- P1 14:20TBLVincent Lecavalier: Hooking2 min
- P2 1:59TBLVictor Hedman: Hooking2 min
- P2 11:45PITBrooks Orpik: Cross checking2 min
- P2 11:45TBLSteve Downie: Slashing2 min
- P2 17:43TBLSteve Downie: Boarding2 min
- P2 17:43TBLVictor Hedman: Roughing2 min
- P2 17:43PITTyler Kennedy: Roughing2 min
- P2 19:28PITJames Neal: Holding2 min
- P2 19:59TBLSteven Stamkos: Interference goalkeeper2 min
- P3 8:31PITMike Rupp: Tripping2 min
- P3 15:36PITAlex Kovalev: Cross checking2 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 Stamkos
- 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.
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestKunitz – Kennedy – Staal9:21
xG 0.43–0.15 (74%)attempts 12–6goals 0–1
- Kovalev – Neal – Letestu7:41
xG 0.25–0.21 (54%)attempts 12–7goals 0–0
- Dupuis – Talbot – Conner9:26
xG 0.16–0.15 (51%)attempts 10–5goals 0–0
- Adams – Rupp – Comrie3:38
xG 0.03–0.18 (16%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestNiskanen – Lovejoy9:07
xG 0.23–0.06 (79%)attempts 11–6goals 0–0
- Martin – Letang2:27
xG 0.15–0.04 (77%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Martin – Michalek12:43
xG 0.45–0.49 (48%)attempts 15–12goals 0–0
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestGagne – Downie – Stamkos8:08
xG 0.45–0.05 (90%)attempts 6–6goals 1–0
- St. Louis – Lecavalier – Malone3:17
xG 0.07–0.03 (70%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- St. Louis – Lecavalier – Thompson5:49
xG 0.19–0.20 (48%)attempts 5–7goals 1–0
- Hall – Moore – Tyrell7:01
xG 0.06–0.17 (27%)attempts 4–10goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestLundin – Hedman2:22
xG 0.12–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 1–0
- Clark – Hedman2:13
xG 0.01–0.01 (50%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Kubina – Hedman10:16
xG 0.11–0.14 (43%)attempts 4–13goals 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.
TBL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line TBL is favoured, below it PIT. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 61% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − PIT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).