Mon, Mar 18, 2013·Honda Center, Anaheim
San Jose Sharks 3, Anaheim Ducks 5
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 56% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SJS | 19 | 110 | 116 | 335 |
| ANA | 17 | 315 | 16 | 528 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 14:06ANAFrancois BeaucheminAssists: David Steckel, Kyle Palmieri · Slap, 0.06 xG0–1
- P1 19:02SJSJason DemersAssists: TJ Galiardi, Scott Gomez · Slap, 0.02 xG1–1
- P2 11:09ANAPeter HollandAssists: Andrew Cogliano, Bobby Ryan · Wrist, 0.13 xG1–2
- P2 11:43ANAEmerson EtemAssists: Daniel Winnik, Bryan Allen · Wrist, 0.13 xG1–3
- P2 13:55ANARyan GetzlafSHGWGAssists: Emerson Etem · Tip-in, 0.14 xG1–4
- P2 19:31SJSPatrick MarleauAssists: Martin Havlat, Douglas Murray · Wrist, 0.08 xG2–4
- P3 6:48SJSMatt IrwinAssists: Brent Burns · Slap, 0.13 xG3–4
- P3 19:14ANAFrancois BeaucheminENAssists: Ryan Getzlaf, Daniel Winnik · Wrist, 0.74 xG3–5
Penalties (6)
- P1 2:20SJSAndrew Desjardins: Fighting5 min
- P1 2:20ANASheldon Souray: Fighting5 min
- P2 5:53SJSMichal Handzus: Tripping2 min
- P2 12:15ANAMatt Beleskey: Hooking2 min
- P2 19:54ANASaku Koivu: Interference2 min
- P3 19:53ANABryan Allen: 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 20:00Thornton won the faceoff against Getzlaf
- 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
- bestGomez – Galiardi – Wingels13:57
xG 0.62–0.13 (83%)attempts 18–4goals 1–0
- Marleau – Havlat – Pavelski12:58
xG 0.19–0.28 (41%)attempts 9–8goals 1–1
- Handzus – Burish – Desjardins5:30
xG 0.10–0.26 (28%)attempts 5–4goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestVlasic – Demers13:02
xG 0.40–0.16 (71%)attempts 17–4goals 1–1
- Boyle – Irwin12:43
xG 0.69–0.60 (53%)attempts 14–8goals 0–1
- Stuart – Murray8:37
xG 0.30–0.33 (47%)attempts 7–6goals 1–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestRyan – Holland – Etem3:18
xG 0.40–0.01 (96%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Steckel – Staubitz – Beleskey6:50
xG 0.19–0.11 (63%)attempts 5–9goals 0–0
- Winnik – Holland – Etem3:52
xG 0.24–0.21 (53%)attempts 4–7goals 1–0
- Selanne – Getzlaf – Palmieri11:17
xG 0.27–0.24 (52%)attempts 7–5goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestLydman – Sbisa16:53
xG 0.61–0.43 (58%)attempts 10–18goals 0–1
- Souray – Beauchemin15:01
xG 0.57–0.53 (52%)attempts 13–14goals 2–1
- Allen – Fowler16:31
xG 0.40–0.73 (35%)attempts 7–21goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 56% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − SJS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).