Sun, Mar 11, 2012·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
Boston Bruins 2, Pittsburgh Penguins 5
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 70% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOS | 07 | 216 | 013 | 236 |
| PIT | 310 | 111 | 111 | 532 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:24PITArron AshamAssists: Ben Lovejoy, Craig Adams · Wrist, 0.06 xG0–1
- P1 7:12PITMatt NiskanenAssists: Evgeni Malkin, James Neal · Slap, 0.02 xG0–2
- P1 18:48PITJames NealPPGWGAssists: Evgeni Malkin · Snap, 0.20 xG0–3
- P2 1:56BOSDavid KrejciAssists: Tyler Seguin, Milan Lucic · Snap, 0.18 xG1–3
- P2 4:27PITChris KunitzAssists: James Neal, Evgeni Malkin · Snap, 0.13 xG1–4
- P2 10:01BOSDavid KrejciAssists: Milan Lucic, Tyler Seguin · Wrist, 0.12 xG2–4
- P3 16:07PITPascal DupuisAssists: Jordan Staal, Deryk Engelland · Backhand, 0.10 xG2–5
Penalties (6)
- P1 4:25PITJames Neal: Interference2 min
- P1 17:16BOSMilan Lucic: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P1 17:51BOSZdeno Chara: Interference2 min
- P1 19:35BOSDennis Seidenberg: Tripping2 min
- P3 13:29PITEvgeni Malkin: Boarding2 min
- P3 18:08BOSJohnny Boychuk: Interference goalkeeper2 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 20:00Bergeron won the faceoff against Vitale
- 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.
Boston Bruins
Forward lines
- bestKrejci – Lucic – Seguin18:04
xG 0.82–0.65 (56%)attempts 31–8goals 2–2
- Rolston – Kelly – Sauve3:26
xG 0.12–0.12 (50%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Bergeron – Marchand – Caron3:46
xG 0.00–0.03 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
- Rolston – Thornton – Campbell3:56
xG 0.12–0.17 (41%)attempts 3–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCorvo – Ference7:10
xG 0.37–0.14 (73%)attempts 6–3goals 1–0
- Seidenberg – Boychuk7:06
xG 0.25–0.08 (76%)attempts 15–3goals 0–0
- Chara – Seidenberg3:12
xG 0.04–0.05 (40%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestAdams – Cooke – Staal2:06
xG 0.32–0.08 (80%)attempts 4–5goals 0–0
- Cooke – Kennedy – Vitale5:19
xG 0.24–0.13 (65%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Kunitz – Malkin – Neal10:46
xG 0.53–0.43 (55%)attempts 15–10goals 1–1
- Sullivan – Dupuis – Staal8:34
xG 0.32–0.29 (53%)attempts 4–13goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestEngelland – Niskanen18:04
xG 0.63–0.20 (76%)attempts 20–13goals 2–0
- Lovejoy – Despres11:03
xG 0.43–0.39 (52%)attempts 11–12goals 1–0
- Orpik – Michalek16:41
xG 0.52–0.59 (47%)attempts 8–22goals 1–1
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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it BOS. 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 70% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − BOS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).