Sat, Jan 7, 2012·Centre Bell, Montreal
Tampa Bay Lightning 1, Montréal Canadiens 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Montréal Canadiens win this game 77% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 18 | 09 | 07 | 124 |
| MTL | 07 | 212 | 19 | 328 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:24TBLVincent LecavalierAssists: Dominic Moore, Eric Brewer · Tip-in, 0.18 xG1–0
- P2 5:44MTLMike BlundenAssists: Hal Gill, Mathieu Darche · Backhand, 0.09 xG1–1
- P2 7:17MTLMax PaciorettyGWGAssists: P.K. Subban · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–2
- P3 19:43MTLErik ColePPAssists: David Desharnais, Max Pacioretty · Tip-in, 0.17 xG1–3
Penalties (3)
- P1 17:59TBLDana Tyrell: Holding2 min
- P2 1:57MTLTomas Plekanec: High sticking2 min
- P3 19:30TBLMarc-Andre Bergeron: Hooking2 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 20:00Plekanec won the faceoff against Lecavalier
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestSt. Louis – Downie – Stamkos7:31
xG 0.31–0.06 (84%)attempts 8–3goals 0–1
- Pyatt – Purcell – Connolly2:23
xG 0.23–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–0goals 0–0
- Malone – Thompson – Purcell4:51
xG 0.04–0.16 (21%)attempts 5–3goals 0–1
- Lecavalier – Moore – Connolly5:42
xG 0.39–0.61 (39%)attempts 5–10goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- Kubina – Brewer16:55
xG 0.64–0.70 (48%)attempts 12–19goals 1–1
- Kubina – Bergeron3:21
xG 0.01–0.11 (10%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Clark – Gilroy15:41
xG 0.25–0.55 (31%)attempts 14–13goals 0–0
Montréal Canadiens
Forward lines
- bestMoen – Kostitsyn – Eller16:38
xG 0.81–0.29 (74%)attempts 17–11goals 0–0
- Cole – Desharnais – Pacioretty13:11
xG 0.51–0.37 (58%)attempts 14–8goals 1–0
- Darche – Blunden – Desharnais2:38
xG 0.14–0.01 (93%)attempts 4–2goals 1–0
- Gionta – Cammalleri – Plekanec12:31
xG 0.34–0.35 (49%)attempts 8–15goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKaberle – Emelin5:49
xG 0.44–0.01 (97%)attempts 8–3goals 0–0
- Gorges – Subban18:42
xG 0.79–0.66 (55%)attempts 22–19goals 1–0
- Campoli – Diaz3:10
xG 0.12–0.02 (88%)attempts 2–1goals 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.
MTL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line MTL is favoured, below it TBL. 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, Montréal Canadiens win this game 77% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MTL − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).