Sun, Feb 26, 2012·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
Columbus Blue Jackets 2, Pittsburgh Penguins 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 81% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBJ | 05 | 110 | 19 | 224 |
| PIT | 015 | 111 | 314 | 440 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 9:49CBJRick NashSHAssists: Nikita Nikitin · Wrist, 0.17 xG1–0
- P2 19:12PITEvgeni MalkinPPAssists: James Neal, Steve Sullivan · Wrist, 0.08 xG1–1
- P3 5:50PITPascal DupuisAssists: Steve Sullivan, Jordan Staal · Wrist, 0.02 xG1–2
- P3 10:47PITKris LetangPPGWGAssists: Richard Park, Matt Cooke · Slap, 0.05 xG1–3
- P3 14:57PITJoe VitaleAssists: Eric Tangradi, Matt Cooke · Wrist, 0.36 xG1–4
- P3 15:07CBJVinny ProspalAssists: Cam Atkinson · Wrist, 0.04 xG2–4
Penalties (7)
- P2 0:23PITBrooks Orpik: Interference2 min
- P2 3:00CBJFedor Tyutin: Holding2 min
- P2 9:00CBJDerek Dorsett: Boarding2 min
- P2 11:55PITPascal Dupuis: Tripping2 min
- P2 17:53CBJR.J. Umberger: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P3 9:18CBJDerick Brassard: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P3 18:48CBJJames Wisniewski: High sticking2 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 20:00Vitale won the faceoff against Letestu
- 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.
Columbus Blue Jackets
Forward lines
- MacKenzie – Gillies – Johansen6:00
xG 0.09–0.17 (34%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Pahlsson – Russell – Dorsett9:55
xG 0.23–0.54 (30%)attempts 3–19goals 0–0
- Umberger – Nash – Brassard13:55
xG 0.20–0.61 (24%)attempts 12–16goals 0–1
- Prospal – Letestu – Atkinson11:46
xG 0.17–0.69 (20%)attempts 13–9goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- Tyutin – Nikitin17:51
xG 0.49–0.64 (43%)attempts 17–18goals 0–0
- Lebda – Moore11:27
xG 0.11–0.44 (21%)attempts 7–13goals 0–0
- Wisniewski – Johnson15:53
xG 0.13–1.26 (9%)attempts 9–21goals 1–2
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestSullivan – Dupuis – Staal10:36
xG 0.45–0.01 (97%)attempts 13–5goals 1–0
- Kunitz – Malkin – Neal10:08
xG 0.45–0.30 (60%)attempts 14–8goals 0–0
- Adams – Tangradi – Jeffrey2:47
xG 0.06–0.01 (82%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Park – Cooke – Vitale4:51
xG 0.10–0.08 (54%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestOrpik – Michalek18:10
xG 1.18–0.18 (87%)attempts 24–11goals 2–0
- Martin – Letang15:47
xG 0.73–0.29 (71%)attempts 15–16goals 0–1
- Engelland – Niskanen10:28
xG 0.33–0.26 (56%)attempts 11–6goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it CBJ. 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 81% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − CBJ), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).