Tue, Feb 12, 2013·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
San Jose Sharks 0, Nashville Predators 1 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 60% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SJS | 013 | 06 | 03 | 03 | 025 |
| NSH | 03 | 011 | 010 | 11 | 125 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- OT 2:08NSHColin WilsonGWGAssists: Ryan Ellis, David Legwand · Tip-in, 0.14 xG0–1
Penalties (8)
- P1 14:20SJSJustin Braun: Interference2 min
- P2 1:48NSHMartin Erat: High sticking double minor4 min
- P2 2:47SJSJason Demers: Tripping2 min
- P2 6:31NSHMartin Erat: Holding the stick2 min
- P2 10:05SJSPatrick Marleau: Tripping2 min
- P2 11:05NSHMartin Erat: Hooking2 min
- P2 12:24NSHNick Spaling: High sticking2 min
- P2 18:41NSHColin Wilson: 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 20:00Spaling won the faceoff against Handzus
- 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.
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestHavlat – Burish – Galiardi8:20
xG 0.52–0.29 (64%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- Handzus – Sheppard – Wingels9:37
xG 0.14–0.05 (73%)attempts 5–5goals 0–0
- Thornton – Marleau – Pavelski9:07
xG 0.19–0.14 (58%)attempts 7–6goals 0–0
- Clowe – Kennedy – Couture9:32
xG 0.08–0.32 (21%)attempts 10–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBoyle – Stuart15:08
xG 0.56–0.22 (71%)attempts 12–13goals 0–0
- Vlasic – Demers12:32
xG 0.35–0.17 (67%)attempts 11–7goals 0–0
- Vlasic – Braun2:24
xG 0.05–0.09 (33%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- Gaustad – Clune – Halischuk4:16
xG 0.13–0.09 (59%)attempts 1–4goals 0–0
- Legwand – Wilson – Bourque7:34
xG 0.24–0.27 (47%)attempts 7–6goals 0–0
- Yip – Spaling – Smith6:47
xG 0.04–0.19 (17%)attempts 5–7goals 0–0
- Fisher – Erat – Kostitsyn9:32
xG 0.09–0.40 (18%)attempts 6–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Klein – Josi14:17
xG 0.35–0.32 (52%)attempts 13–11goals 0–0
- Blum – Ellis13:43
xG 0.32–0.41 (44%)attempts 10–9goals 0–0
- Hannan – Weber14:04
xG 0.17–0.47 (27%)attempts 7–14goals 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 SJS. 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 60% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − SJS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).