Sat, Feb 25, 2012·Rexall Place, Edmonton
Phoenix Coyotes 3, Edmonton Oilers 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Edmonton Oilers win this game 67% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PHX | 26 | 07 | 17 | 320 |
| EDM | 08 | 07 | 17 | 122 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:43PHXOliver Ekman-LarssonAssists: Martin Hanzal · Slap, 0.02 xG1–0
- P1 18:46PHXRay WhitneyGWGAssists: Radim Vrbata, Martin Hanzal · Wrist, 0.14 xG2–0
- P3 8:28EDMRyan Nugent-HopkinsAssists: Ales Hemsky, Taylor Hall · Tip-in, 0.12 xG2–1
- P3 17:32PHXShane DoanAssists: Keith Yandle, Adrian Aucoin · Snap, 0.03 xG3–1
Penalties (4)
- P1 12:54PHXPaul Bissonnette: Fighting5 min
- P1 12:54EDMDarcy Hordichuk: Fighting5 min
- P1 14:37EDMBen Eager: Tripping2 min
- P2 2:01PHXChris Summers: Hooking2 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 20:00Gagner won the faceoff against Hanzal
- 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.
Phoenix Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestDoan – Vermette – Korpikoski13:41
xG 1.06–0.36 (75%)attempts 19–9goals 1–0
- Pyatt – Gordon – Bissonnette5:07
xG 0.03–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 0–0
- Whitney – Vrbata – Hanzal13:39
xG 0.29–0.29 (50%)attempts 9–9goals 1–0
- Pyatt – Gordon – Boedker4:59
xG 0.06–0.34 (16%)attempts 2–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSummers – Stone11:04
xG 0.29–0.13 (69%)attempts 5–8goals 0–0
- Rozsival – Ekman-Larsson18:57
xG 0.54–0.71 (43%)attempts 19–13goals 1–1
- Aucoin – Yandle20:46
xG 0.99–1.35 (42%)attempts 19–15goals 2–0
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- bestHorcoff – Eager – Paajarvi5:39
xG 0.90–0.03 (97%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Gagner – Eberle – Paajarvi4:44
xG 0.23–0.11 (67%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Hemsky – Hall – Nugent-Hopkins15:42
xG 1.02–0.98 (51%)attempts 17–17goals 1–0
- Smyth – Horcoff – Eager2:58
xG 0.02–0.02 (57%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSutton – Gilbert11:47
xG 1.57–0.16 (91%)attempts 15–10goals 1–0
- Smid – Petry17:58
xG 0.17–0.33 (34%)attempts 10–12goals 0–1
- Whitney – Potter17:49
xG 0.54–1.28 (30%)attempts 10–18goals 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.
EDM's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line EDM is favoured, below it PHX. 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, Edmonton Oilers win this game 67% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (EDM − PHX), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).