Mon, Jan 23, 2012·Rexall Place, Edmonton
San Jose Sharks 1, Edmonton Oilers 2 (SO)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 80% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | SO | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SJS | 013 | 013 | 117 | 02 | 1 | 145 |
| EDM | 05 | 17 | 04 | 02 | 2 | 218 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 6:50EDMJordan EberleAssists: Jeff Petry, Sam Gagner · Wrist, 0.07 xG0–1
- P3 6:23SJSLogan CouturePPAssists: Dan Boyle, Joe Thornton · Tip-in, 0.11 xG1–1
Shootout
- 1. EDM Jordan Eberle stopped
- 2. SJS Michal Handzus stopped
- 3. EDM Sam Gagner scored
- 4. SJS Dan Boyle stopped
- 5. EDM Anton Lander stopped
- 6. SJS Joe Pavelski scored
- 7. EDM Taylor Hall scored
- 8. SJS Logan Couture stopped
Penalties (3)
- P2 2:18SJSColin White: Holding2 min
- P3 5:37EDMAles Hemsky: Kneeing5 min · PPG
- P3 5:37EDMAles Hemsky: Game misconduct10 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 20:00Pavelski won the faceoff against Horcoff
- 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.
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestMarleau – Ferriero – Couture13:24
xG 0.58–0.06 (91%)attempts 20–4goals 0–0
- Thornton – Pavelski – Desjardins12:21
xG 0.45–0.17 (72%)attempts 14–8goals 0–0
- Winchester – Murray – McCarthy4:57
xG 0.21–0.04 (84%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0
- Handzus – Mitchell – McGinn10:24
xG 0.30–0.14 (68%)attempts 9–6goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestWhite – Demers10:25
xG 0.64–0.08 (89%)attempts 13–6goals 0–0
- Boyle – Vlasic16:39
xG 0.67–0.12 (84%)attempts 24–9goals 0–0
- Murray – Burns15:25
xG 0.52–0.23 (69%)attempts 14–10goals 0–1
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- Smyth – Horcoff – Jones2:24
xG 0.04–0.03 (61%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Smyth – Lander – Paajarvi9:52
xG 0.11–0.26 (31%)attempts 4–9goals 0–0
- Belanger – Jones – Petrell6:02
xG 0.08–0.31 (21%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Horcoff – Hemsky – Hartikainen10:33
xG 0.02–0.32 (5%)attempts 3–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSmid – Petry19:00
xG 0.42–0.32 (57%)attempts 13–14goals 1–0
- Sutton – Smid2:02
xG 0.00–0.10 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
- Sutton – Chorney11:24
xG 0.19–0.64 (23%)attempts 9–15goals 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.
EDM's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line EDM is favoured, below it SJS. 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 80% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (EDM − SJS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).