Sun, Mar 24, 2013·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
Philadelphia Flyers 1, Pittsburgh Penguins 2 (OT)
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 69% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PHI | 06 | 111 | 09 | 02 | 128 |
| PIT | 09 | 013 | 111 | 12 | 235 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 14:09PHIClaude GirouxPPAssists: Andrej Meszaros, Jakub Voracek · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–0
- P3 13:46PITSidney CrosbyPPAssists: Paul Martin, Beau Bennett · Slap, 0.17 xG1–1
- OT 2:33PITTyler KennedyGWGAssists: Matt Niskanen, Pascal Dupuis · Snap, 0.05 xG1–2
Penalties (4)
- P1 15:09PHIRuslan Fedotenko: Elbowing2 min
- P2 12:39PITPaul Martin: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P3 12:52PHIWayne Simmonds: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P3 13:15PHIKimmo Timonen: Hooking2 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 20:00Giroux won the faceoff against Sutter
- 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.
Philadelphia Flyers
Forward lines
- bestGagne – Simmonds – Schenn9:00
xG 0.54–0.34 (61%)attempts 12–7goals 0–0
- Giroux – Voracek – Read13:26
xG 0.39–0.35 (52%)attempts 17–11goals 0–0
- Fedotenko – Zolnierczyk – Couturier7:02
xG 0.16–0.34 (32%)attempts 5–9goals 0–0
- Hartnell – Talbot – Rinaldo8:28
xG 0.20–0.39 (34%)attempts 5–9goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMeszaros – Schenn5:13
xG 0.31–0.09 (77%)attempts 9–5goals 0–0
- Foster – Meszaros8:29
xG 0.27–0.25 (53%)attempts 8–7goals 0–0
- Coburn – Meszaros2:28
xG 0.01–0.06 (15%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestDupuis – Kunitz – Crosby12:38
xG 0.98–0.26 (79%)attempts 22–6goals 0–0
- Neal – Jeffrey – Bennett6:41
xG 0.27–0.07 (80%)attempts 9–5goals 0–0
- Adams – Glass – Vitale5:02
xG 0.08–0.05 (62%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Cooke – Kennedy – Sutter11:06
xG 0.20–0.28 (42%)attempts 8–13goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestOrpik – Martin18:18
xG 0.48–0.30 (62%)attempts 14–14goals 0–0
- Martin – Engelland2:25
xG 0.12–0.02 (89%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Engelland – Despres10:12
xG 0.61–0.52 (54%)attempts 13–13goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it PHI. 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 69% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − PHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).