Thu, Feb 2, 2012·Tampa Bay Times Forum, Tampa
Winnipeg Jets 2, Tampa Bay Lightning 1 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 55% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| WPG | 07 | 17 | 08 | 12 | 224 |
| TBL | 06 | 015 | 110 | 00 | 131 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 19:44WPGBlake WheelerAssists: Jim Slater, Andrew Ladd · Wrist, 0.25 xG1–0
- P3 10:34TBLVictor HedmanAssists: Martin St. Louis, Steven Stamkos · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–1
- OT 3:14WPGKyle WellwoodGWGAssists: Blake Wheeler, Dustin Byfuglien · Wrist, 0.06 xG2–1
Penalties (6)
- P1 6:13TBLSteve Downie: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 1:54WPGAaron Gagnon: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 4:09TBLSteve Downie: Hooking2 min
- P2 4:09WPGToby Enstrom: Diving2 min
- P2 6:52TBLMatt Gilroy: Cross checking2 min
- P3 15:50WPGAndrew Ladd: Slashing2 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 20:00Moore won the faceoff against Slater
- 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.
Winnipeg Jets
Forward lines
- bestAntropov – Wellwood – Fehr9:37
xG 0.27–0.14 (65%)attempts 10–6goals 0–0
- Thorburn – Slater – Glass10:08
xG 0.03–0.10 (22%)attempts 3–9goals 0–0
- Miettinen – Gagnon – Burmistrov7:07
xG 0.05–0.39 (11%)attempts 4–7goals 0–0
- Ladd – Wheeler – Little14:02
xG 0.34–0.78 (30%)attempts 11–15goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestHainsey – Bogosian15:44
xG 0.47–0.38 (55%)attempts 8–14goals 1–0
- Oduya – Stuart10:50
xG 0.19–0.41 (32%)attempts 9–8goals 0–0
- Enstrom – Byfuglien17:26
xG 0.42–0.69 (38%)attempts 12–20goals 0–1
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestMoore – Thompson – Labrie2:04
xG 0.14–0.02 (88%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Downie – Purcell – Stamkos5:00
xG 0.20–0.09 (69%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Lecavalier – Moore – Pyatt3:13
xG 0.06–0.04 (59%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- St. Louis – Lecavalier – Pyatt4:59
xG 0.02–0.16 (13%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestClark – Hedman10:16
xG 0.65–0.19 (77%)attempts 10–6goals 0–0
- Mikkelson – Gilroy2:27
xG 0.13–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 0–0
- Kubina – Brewer15:40
xG 0.62–0.50 (55%)attempts 14–10goals 0–1
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 WPG. 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 55% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − WPG), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).