Mon, Apr 1, 2013·HP Pavilion at San Jose, San Jose
Vancouver Canucks 2, San Jose Sharks 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 68% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VAN | 06 | 111 | 18 | 225 |
| SJS | 014 | 313 | 08 | 335 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 7:41SJSAndrew DesjardinsAssists: Adam Burish, Scott Gomez · Wrist, 0.07 xG0–1
- P2 8:22SJSJoe ThorntonAssists: Matt Tennyson · Wrist, 0.03 xG0–2
- P2 9:54SJSLogan CouturePPGWGAssists: Patrick Marleau, Joe Thornton · Wrist, 0.18 xG0–3
- P2 17:26VANChris HigginsAssists: Jannik Hansen, Kevin Bieksa · Wrist, 0.08 xG1–3
- P3 10:20VANAlexandre BurrowsAssists: Chris Higgins, Jannik Hansen · Slap, 0.64 xG2–3
Penalties (5)
- P2 2:15VANChris Higgins: Hooking2 min
- P2 9:07VANKevin Bieksa: Interference2 min · PPG
- P2 15:16VANSteven Pinizzotto: Fighting5 min
- P2 15:16SJSAndrew Desjardins: Fighting5 min
- P3 4:29VANAlexandre Burrows: Slashing2 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 20:00Burrows won the faceoff against Pavelski
- 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.
Vancouver Canucks
Forward lines
- bestHiggins – Burrows – Hansen14:19
xG 1.36–0.12 (92%)attempts 24–8goals 2–0
- Sedin – Sedin – Jensen15:43
xG 0.42–0.38 (52%)attempts 22–11goals 0–0
- Lapierre – Sweatt – Schroeder10:28
xG 0.27–0.32 (46%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0
- Sestito – Ebbett – Pinizzotto4:15
xG 0.05–0.13 (28%)attempts 3–7goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestBieksa – Edler18:18
xG 1.16–0.77 (60%)attempts 33–14goals 1–0
- Hamhuis – Garrison17:39
xG 0.94–0.90 (51%)attempts 16–19goals 1–0
- Edler – Tanev3:27
xG 0.01–0.13 (6%)attempts 1–3goals 0–2
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestGomez – Burish – Desjardins6:07
xG 1.02–0.08 (93%)attempts 15–3goals 1–0
- Marleau – Couture – Wingels10:05
xG 0.26–0.18 (59%)attempts 6–10goals 0–0
- Pavelski – Sheppard – Galiardi15:55
xG 0.08–0.26 (23%)attempts 7–22goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestStuart – Tennyson11:33
xG 0.97–0.19 (84%)attempts 15–14goals 0–0
- Vlasic – Braun12:31
xG 0.37–0.25 (60%)attempts 7–10goals 0–0
- Boyle – Irwin13:04
xG 0.20–0.36 (35%)attempts 9–15goals 1–0
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.
SJS's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line SJS is favoured, below it VAN. 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 68% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (SJS − VAN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).