Sun, Feb 10, 2013·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Chicago Blackhawks 3, Nashville Predators 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 56% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 010 | 210 | 17 | 327 |
| NSH | 03 | 04 | 010 | 017 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 6:14CHIMarcus KrugerGWGUnassisted · Snap, 0.06 xG1–0
- P2 7:20CHIJonathan ToewsAssists: Duncan Keith, Marian Hossa · Deflected, 0.11 xG2–0
- P3 4:27CHIPatrick KaneAssists: Dave Bolland, Michal Rozsival · Snap, 0.04 xG3–0
Penalties (5)
- P2 2:41NSHRich Clune: Fighting5 min
- P2 2:41CHIAndrew Shaw: Fighting5 min
- P2 3:27NSHSergei Kostitsyn: Hooking2 min
- P2 9:31CHIMarcus Kruger: Tripping2 min
- P2 10:24NSHMartin Erat: 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 20:00Toews won the faceoff against Fisher
- 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.
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestSharp – Bolland – Kane11:00
xG 0.56–0.21 (73%)attempts 10–4goals 1–0
- Hossa – Toews – Saad9:05
xG 0.27–0.18 (60%)attempts 7–6goals 0–0
- Mayers – Frolik – Kruger6:36
xG 0.03–0.15 (17%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Bickell – Stalberg – Shaw6:06
xG 0.06–0.30 (18%)attempts 4–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKeith – Seabrook12:26
xG 0.65–0.36 (65%)attempts 12–10goals 0–0
- Keith – Hjalmarsson2:06
xG 0.07–0.00 (100%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
- Rozsival – Leddy10:48
xG 0.12–0.28 (29%)attempts 7–7goals 1–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestGaustad – Clune – Smith2:13
xG 0.20–0.00 (99%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Legwand – Wilson – Bourque7:29
xG 0.28–0.23 (55%)attempts 5–5goals 0–1
- Yip – Spaling – Smith4:11
xG 0.09–0.07 (58%)attempts 2–5goals 0–0
- Clune – Spaling – Smith2:36
xG 0.02–0.06 (25%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBlum – Ellis7:11
xG 0.27–0.04 (87%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
- Hannan – Weber10:23
xG 0.42–0.23 (65%)attempts 11–7goals 0–1
- Gill – Ellis3:12
xG 0.00–0.04 (0%)attempts 1–3goals 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.
NSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NSH is favoured, below it CHI. 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 56% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − CHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).