Wed, Feb 8, 2012·Honda Center, Anaheim
Carolina Hurricanes 2, Anaheim Ducks 3 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 53% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CAR | 111 | 08 | 113 | 01 | 233 |
| ANA | 08 | 112 | 112 | 12 | 334 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 17:57CARTuomo RuutuAssists: Jiri Tlusty, Justin Faulk · Tip-in, 0.29 xG1–0
- P2 12:48ANANick BoninoAssists: Lubomir Visnovsky, Andrew Cogliano · Deflected, 0.11 xG1–1
- P3 3:47CAREric StaalUnassisted · Backhand, 0.09 xG2–1
- P3 5:11ANASaku KoivuAssists: Matt Beleskey, Luca Sbisa · Wrist, 0.34 xG2–2
- OT 2:14ANACorey PerryGWGAssists: Sheldon Brookbank · Slap, 0.05 xG2–3
Penalties (3)
- P1 4:34ANALuca Sbisa: Hooking2 min
- P3 6:16ANARyan Getzlaf: Hooking2 min
- P3 7:31CARChad LaRose: Tripping2 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 20:00Staal won the faceoff against Koivu
- 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. Shift data for this game is incomplete, so treat these as rough.
Carolina Hurricanes
Forward lines
- bestJokinen – Bowman – Skinner11:48
xG 0.78–0.38 (67%)attempts 17–11goals 0–0
- Ruutu – Staal – Tlusty13:24
xG 1.02–0.78 (57%)attempts 12–15goals 2–0
- Dwyer – Nodl – Sutter13:42
xG 0.62–0.44 (58%)attempts 11–14goals 0–1
- LaRose – Brent – Stewart8:27
xG 0.21–0.69 (24%)attempts 10–7goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestSpacek – McBain13:51
xG 0.75–0.52 (59%)attempts 18–13goals 1–1
- Harrison – Faulk19:45
xG 1.14–0.99 (54%)attempts 18–25goals 0–1
- Allen – Gleason19:46
xG 0.96–0.90 (51%)attempts 21–15goals 1–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestHagman – Parros – Pelley5:15
xG 0.34–0.11 (76%)attempts 6–10goals 0–0
- Selanne – Koivu – Beleskey12:57
xG 0.92–0.74 (56%)attempts 20–11goals 1–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – Ryan15:47
xG 1.03–1.10 (48%)attempts 19–15goals 0–1
- Blake – Cogliano – Bonino14:26
xG 0.30–0.80 (27%)attempts 9–20goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestBeauchemin – Fowler18:22
xG 0.87–0.80 (52%)attempts 22–20goals 0–1
- Visnovsky – Sbisa16:10
xG 0.74–0.72 (51%)attempts 14–14goals 2–0
- Lydman – Brookbank15:40
xG 1.03–1.23 (46%)attempts 19–21goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it CAR. 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 53% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − CAR), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).