Tue, Feb 26, 2013·Tampa Bay Times Forum, Tampa
Buffalo Sabres 2, Tampa Bay Lightning 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 73% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 15 | 010 | 16 | 221 |
| TBL | 15 | 014 | 012 | 131 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 1:24TBLSteven StamkosAssists: Teddy Purcell, Cory Conacher · Wrist, 0.21 xG0–1
- P1 10:02BUFCody HodgsonAssists: Andrej Sekera, Thomas Vanek · Backhand, 0.08 xG1–1
- P3 0:52BUFTyler MyersGWGAssists: Thomas Vanek, Cody Hodgson · Wrist, 0.08 xG2–1
Penalties (7)
- P1 2:57TBLBrian Lee: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P1 10:38BUFNathan Gerbe: Holding the stick2 min
- P1 13:56BUFRobyn Regehr: Interference2 min
- P2 5:15BUFTyler Myers: High sticking2 min
- P2 7:38BUFDrew Stafford: High sticking2 min
- P2 8:53BUFTyler Myers: Hooking2 min
- P3 4:54BUFChristian Ehrhoff: 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 20:00Hodgson won the faceoff against Thompson
- 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.
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestPominville – Vanek – Hodgson13:47
xG 0.60–0.28 (68%)attempts 14–6goals 2–0
- Hecht – Kaleta – Grigorenko4:26
xG 0.14–0.06 (72%)attempts 5–5goals 0–0
- Stafford – Porter – Foligno6:26
xG 0.11–0.30 (27%)attempts 1–8goals 0–0
- Ott – Gerbe – Ennis10:29
xG 0.31–0.61 (34%)attempts 10–11goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- Ehrhoff – Myers13:05
xG 0.53–0.50 (51%)attempts 13–8goals 1–1
- Regehr – Sekera15:05
xG 0.33–0.48 (41%)attempts 11–15goals 0–0
- Pardy – Weber9:46
xG 0.24–0.42 (36%)attempts 6–9goals 0–0
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestPurcell – Stamkos – Conacher9:08
xG 0.79–0.15 (84%)attempts 12–3goals 1–0
- St. Louis – Lecavalier – Pouliot11:05
xG 0.34–0.32 (52%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0
- Thompson – Pyatt – Killorn7:51
xG 0.25–0.33 (43%)attempts 7–7goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestCarle – Hedman2:16
xG 0.23–0.05 (81%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Brewer – Carle6:44
xG 0.32–0.17 (66%)attempts 6–3goals 1–0
- Bergeron – Aulie4:23
xG 0.32–0.17 (66%)attempts 9–4goals 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 BUF. 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 73% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).