Tue, Jan 24, 2012·Prudential Center, Newark
Buffalo Sabres 2, New Jersey Devils 1 (SO)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, New Jersey Devils win this game 82% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | SO | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 16 | 03 | 04 | 01 | 2 | 214 |
| NJD | 06 | 112 | 06 | 04 | 1 | 128 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 16:34BUFJordan LeopoldAssists: Nathan Gerbe, Matt Ellis · Snap, 0.24 xG1–0
- P2 10:22NJDPatrik EliasPPAssists: Zach Parise, Kurtis Foster · Snap, 0.09 xG1–1
Shootout
- 1. NJD Ilya Kovalchuk scored
- 2. BUF Thomas Vanek stopped
- 3. NJD Zach Parise stopped
- 4. BUF Brad Boyes stopped
- 5. NJD Patrik Elias stopped
- 6. BUF Jason Pominville scored
- 7. NJD Adam Henrique stopped
- 8. BUF Nathan Gerbe scored
Penalties (3)
- P1 1:47NJDAlexei Ponikarovsky: Tripping2 min
- P2 6:37BUFDerek Roy: Tripping2 min
- P2 9:07BUFDerek Roy: Boarding2 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 20:00Elias won the faceoff against Roy
- 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.
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- Boyes – Stafford – Leino13:59
xG 0.27–0.36 (43%)attempts 9–11goals 0–0
- Roy – Pominville – Vanek13:46
xG 0.23–0.32 (42%)attempts 4–10goals 0–0
- Ellis – Kaleta – Gerbe11:48
xG 0.17–0.41 (29%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Sekera – Myers16:43
xG 0.37–0.44 (46%)attempts 11–14goals 0–0
- Leopold – Ehrhoff16:21
xG 0.41–0.61 (40%)attempts 5–9goals 1–0
- Regehr – Weber13:08
xG 0.18–0.72 (20%)attempts 4–11goals 0–0
New Jersey Devils
Forward lines
- bestPonikarovsky – Carter – Henrique6:57
xG 0.71–0.10 (87%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Zubrus – Kovalchuk – Parise8:50
xG 0.53–0.17 (76%)attempts 6–4goals 0–0
- Boulton – Kovalchuk – Carter2:11
xG 0.25–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Sykora – Elias – Clarkson6:40
xG 0.17–0.04 (80%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestVolchenkov – Foster8:05
xG 0.65–0.24 (73%)attempts 10–1goals 0–1
- Salvador – Larsson13:03
xG 0.64–0.30 (68%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Volchenkov – Harrold2:55
xG 0.26–0.03 (91%)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.
NJD's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NJD is favoured, below it BUF. 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, New Jersey Devils win this game 82% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NJD − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).