Mon, Mar 5, 2012·Honda Center, Anaheim
Edmonton Oilers 2, Anaheim Ducks 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 51% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDM | 04 | 122 | 110 | 236 |
| ANA | 111 | 08 | 311 | 430 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 17:18ANAJason BlakePPAssists: Bobby Ryan, Cam Fowler · Tip-in, 0.22 xG0–1
- P2 19:29EDMShawn HorcoffAssists: Nick Schultz · Deflected, 0.06 xG1–1
- P3 8:09ANABobby RyanAssists: Teemu Selanne · Backhand, 0.11 xG1–2
- P3 16:40ANACorey PerryGWGAssists: Niklas Hagman · Wrist, 0.10 xG1–3
- P3 18:14EDMJordan EberlePPAssists: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Shawn Horcoff · Wrist, 0.05 xG2–3
- P3 18:46ANACorey PerryUnassisted · Wrist, 0.08 xG2–4
Penalties (5)
- P1 15:19EDMAles Hemsky: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P3 8:33EDMAndy Sutton: Roughing2 min
- P3 17:13ANATeemu Selanne: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P3 0:00EDMAndy Sutton: Slashing2 min
- P3 0:00EDMAndy Sutton: Roughing2 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 20:00Horcoff won the faceoff against Bonino
- 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.
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- bestHemsky – Gagner – Hall13:34
xG 1.01–0.38 (72%)attempts 16–7goals 0–1
- Petrell – Eberle – Nugent-Hopkins10:11
xG 0.58–0.17 (77%)attempts 8–6goals 0–0
- Belanger – Eager – Eberle4:10
xG 0.27–0.37 (42%)attempts 5–5goals 0–0
- Belanger – Hordichuk – Eager2:09
xG 0.09–0.22 (28%)attempts 1–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestWhitney – Potter17:09
xG 1.67–0.83 (67%)attempts 22–13goals 0–2
- Sutton – Schultz10:59
xG 1.11–0.50 (69%)attempts 16–13goals 0–0
- Smid – Petry17:56
xG 0.59–0.33 (64%)attempts 13–11goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestHagman – Getzlaf – Perry14:49
xG 0.80–0.53 (60%)attempts 15–13goals 1–0
- Blake – Pelley – Smith-Pelly2:39
xG 0.08–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Cogliano – Bonino – Smith-Pelly7:52
xG 0.13–0.53 (19%)attempts 6–11goals 0–0
- Blake – Pelley – Beleskey8:58
xG 0.25–0.67 (27%)attempts 5–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Beauchemin – Sbisa2:06
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 0–3goals 0–0
- Lydman – Brookbank15:45
xG 0.33–0.51 (39%)attempts 10–11goals 1–0
- Visnovsky – Sbisa15:50
xG 0.77–1.08 (42%)attempts 16–17goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it EDM. 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 51% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − EDM), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).