Sat, Mar 23, 2013·Centre Bell, Montreal
Buffalo Sabres 2, Montréal Canadiens 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Montréal Canadiens win this game 78% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 05 | 28 | 05 | 218 |
| MTL | 013 | 010 | 116 | 139 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 10:25BUFThomas VanekPPAssists: Christian Ehrhoff, Cody Hodgson · Tip-in, 0.33 xG1–0
- P2 19:21BUFThomas VanekGWGAssists: Tyler Ennis, Ville Leino · Backhand, 0.09 xG2–0
- P3 8:17MTLMichael RyderPPAssists: Andrei Markov · Tip-in, 0.19 xG2–1
Penalties (6)
- P1 17:16BUFSteve Ott: Tripping2 min
- P1 18:12MTLP.K. Subban: Tripping2 min
- P2 4:49BUFVille Leino: Holding2 min
- P2 9:09MTLMike Blunden: Interference2 min · PPG
- P2 9:48MTLP.K. Subban: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P3 6:52BUFMarcus Foligno: Tripping2 min · PPG
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 20:00Desharnais won the faceoff against Hodgson
- 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
- Porter – Foligno – Flynn6:33
xG 0.01–0.02 (40%)attempts 1–3goals 0–0
- Ott – Pominville – Hodgson14:26
xG 0.13–0.40 (25%)attempts 5–16goals 0–0
- Hecht – Kaleta – Gerbe8:41
xG 0.18–0.48 (28%)attempts 6–11goals 0–0
- Vanek – Leino – Ennis10:46
xG 0.17–0.90 (16%)attempts 3–22goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- Ehrhoff – Weber14:59
xG 0.19–0.23 (45%)attempts 7–19goals 1–0
- Leopold – Pysyk12:08
xG 0.29–0.47 (38%)attempts 7–17goals 0–0
- Ehrhoff – Pysyk3:06
xG 0.08–0.42 (16%)attempts 1–12goals 0–0
Montréal Canadiens
Forward lines
- bestGionta – Ryder – Plekanec13:20
xG 0.85–0.08 (91%)attempts 18–4goals 0–0
- Armstrong – Eller – Galchenyuk12:23
xG 0.46–0.26 (64%)attempts 18–7goals 0–0
- Moen – Blunden – Dumont4:27
xG 0.17–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 0–0
- Desharnais – Pacioretty – Gallagher12:28
xG 0.38–0.26 (59%)attempts 22–7goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestMarkov – Emelin14:44
xG 1.15–0.17 (87%)attempts 24–6goals 0–0
- Gorges – Subban13:33
xG 0.39–0.14 (74%)attempts 14–7goals 0–1
- Markov – Subban2:53
xG 0.11–0.01 (92%)attempts 4–1goals 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.
MTL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line MTL 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, Montréal Canadiens win this game 78% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (MTL − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).