Thu, Mar 22, 2012·Tampa Bay Times Forum, Tampa
Edmonton Oilers 2, Tampa Bay Lightning 3 (SO)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | SO | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDM | 015 | 110 | 111 | 00 | 2 | 236 |
| TBL | 07 | 210 | 01 | 03 | 3 | 321 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 3:24TBLTom PyattPPAssists: Victor Hedman, Brett Connolly · Tip-in, 0.15 xG0–1
- P2 9:57EDMLinus OmarkAssists: Ryan Whitney, Ryan Smyth · Tip-in, 0.09 xG1–1
- P2 18:18TBLTom PyattAssists: JT Wyman, Tim Wallace · Wrist, 0.20 xG1–2
- P3 16:13EDMLadislav SmidAssists: Ryan Nugent-Hopkins, Sam Gagner · Wrist, 0.06 xG2–2
Shootout
- 1. TBL Tom Pyatt stopped
- 2. EDM Jordan Eberle stopped
- 3. TBL Ryan Malone stopped
- 4. EDM Sam Gagner scored
- 5. TBL Steven Stamkos scored
- 6. EDM Linus Omark stopped
- 7. TBL Martin St. Louis scored
- 8. EDM Ales Hemsky scored
- 9. TBL Victor Hedman stopped
- 10. EDM Teemu Hartikainen stopped
- 11. TBL Teddy Purcell scored
- 12. EDM Ryan Smyth stopped
Penalties (5)
- P1 16:34EDMRyan Smyth: High sticking2 min
- P2 1:46EDMRyan Smyth: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P2 5:26TBLBrendan Mikkelson: Tripping2 min
- P2 11:13EDMAndy Sutton: Hooking2 min
- OT 3:00EDMJeff Petry: 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 20:00Smith won the faceoff against Gagner
- 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.
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- bestHemsky – Gagner – Hartikainen13:02
xG 0.46–0.05 (90%)attempts 16–4goals 0–0
- Smyth – Eberle – Nugent-Hopkins2:07
xG 0.37–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 0–0
- Smyth – Horcoff – Omark11:07
xG 0.39–0.27 (59%)attempts 14–7goals 1–0
- Belanger – Hemsky – Eager2:58
xG 0.08–0.04 (65%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSmid – Petry14:28
xG 0.72–0.26 (73%)attempts 17–8goals 1–0
- Sutton – Potter11:06
xG 0.54–0.35 (61%)attempts 14–5goals 0–1
- Schultz – Whitney14:17
xG 0.38–0.21 (64%)attempts 14–10goals 0–0
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestWyman – Pyatt – Wallace7:25
xG 0.41–0.23 (64%)attempts 4–8goals 1–0
- St. Louis – Purcell – Stamkos4:03
xG 0.02–0.18 (9%)attempts 2–5goals 0–1
- St. Louis – Malone – Smith9:45
xG 0.24–0.44 (36%)attempts 7–11goals 0–0
- Purcell – Stamkos – Connolly10:56
xG 0.18–0.71 (21%)attempts 5–16goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCommodore – Mikkelson2:06
xG 0.20–0.01 (96%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Lee – Mikkelson2:35
xG 0.06–0.04 (59%)attempts 1–2goals 0–0
- Clark – Lee6:27
xG 0.23–0.22 (51%)attempts 4–6goals 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.
TBL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line TBL 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − EDM), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).