Wed, Nov 23, 2011·HP Pavilion at San Jose, San Jose
Chicago Blackhawks 0, San Jose Sharks 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 81% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 010 | 013 | 011 | 034 |
| SJS | 05 | 16 | 010 | 121 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 17:08SJSJason DemersPPGWGAssists: Ryane Clowe, Logan Couture · Slap, 0.02 xG0–1
Penalties (8)
- P1 7:25SJSDan Boyle: Tripping2 min
- P1 13:10SJSDan Boyle: Boarding2 min
- P2 1:08CHIViktor Stalberg: Interference2 min
- P2 10:10SJSDan Boyle: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P2 17:04CHIDave Bolland: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P2 18:52CHIPatrick Kane: Hooking2 min
- P3 12:48CHISteve Montador: Cross checking2 min
- P3 13:54SJSJoe Pavelski: Interference goalkeeper2 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 20:00Marleau won the faceoff against Bolland
- 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.
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestHossa – Stalberg – Toews7:40
xG 0.73–0.10 (88%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
- Bolland – Bickell – Frolik6:50
xG 0.16–0.08 (66%)attempts 3–7goals 0–0
- Sharp – Carcillo – Kane5:18
xG 0.18–0.13 (58%)attempts 7–5goals 0–0
- Sharp – Toews – Kane3:00
xG 0.10–0.10 (49%)attempts 4–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestO'Donnell – Leddy11:49
xG 0.94–0.16 (86%)attempts 12–6goals 0–0
- Keith – Hjalmarsson13:51
xG 0.37–0.32 (54%)attempts 13–13goals 0–0
- Keith – Leddy4:23
xG 0.13–0.15 (46%)attempts 2–5goals 0–0
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestWinchester – Murray – Desjardins4:31
xG 0.23–0.03 (88%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Marleau – Clowe – Mitchell5:52
xG 0.14–0.05 (73%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Thornton – Marleau – Pavelski6:35
xG 0.14–0.16 (46%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Thornton – Pavelski – Couture5:55
xG 0.10–0.18 (35%)attempts 4–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestVandermeer – Demers9:20
xG 0.23–0.18 (56%)attempts 7–7goals 0–0
- Boyle – Murray10:40
xG 0.31–0.39 (45%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0
- Burns – Vlasic13:53
xG 0.28–0.52 (35%)attempts 11–13goals 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.
SJS's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line SJS is favoured, below it CHI. 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 81% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (SJS − CHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).