Tue, Apr 2, 2013·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
Buffalo Sabres 4, Pittsburgh Penguins 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Buffalo Sabres win this game 63% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 28 | 212 | 09 | 429 |
| PIT | 111 | 03 | 06 | 120 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:24BUFKevin PorterSHUnassisted · Wrist, 0.05 xG1–0
- P1 13:27PITJarome IginlaPPAssists: Chris Kunitz, Evgeni Malkin · Wrist, 0.22 xG1–1
- P1 18:10BUFSteve OttGWGAssists: Jason Pominville, Adam Pardy · Slap, 0.04 xG2–1
- P2 2:21BUFCody HodgsonAssists: Jason Pominville, Mark Pysyk · Wrist, 0.33 xG3–1
- P2 3:28BUFKevin PorterAssists: Brian Flynn, Andrej Sekera · Wrist, 0.03 xG4–1
Penalties (9)
- P1 7:15BUFDrew Stafford: Slashing2 min
- P1 9:39BUFMike Weber: Boarding2 min
- P1 9:39BUFMike Weber: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P2 8:22PITDeryk Engelland: Roughing2 min
- P2 10:25PITSimon Despres: Boarding2 min
- P2 14:32PITBrenden Morrow: Cross checking2 min
- P3 3:15PITJames Neal: Interference2 min
- P3 6:12PITChris Kunitz: Tripping2 min
- P3 15:10BUFCody Hodgson: 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 20:00Hecht won the faceoff against Kennedy
- 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. Shift data for this game is incomplete, so treat these as rough.
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestOtt – Pominville – Hodgson8:22
xG 0.57–0.27 (68%)attempts 8–9goals 2–0
- Stafford – Ennis – Foligno9:02
xG 0.30–0.13 (70%)attempts 7–3goals 0–0
- Porter – Adam – Flynn8:15
xG 0.29–0.15 (66%)attempts 8–6goals 1–0
- Hecht – Kaleta – Gerbe9:05
xG 0.17–0.47 (27%)attempts 8–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSekera – Weber13:41
xG 0.44–0.13 (77%)attempts 15–5goals 1–0
- Ehrhoff – Myers13:11
xG 0.02–0.27 (8%)attempts 5–11goals 0–0
- Pardy – Pysyk7:04
xG 0.12–0.51 (19%)attempts 4–9goals 1–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestIginla – Malkin – Neal11:45
xG 0.53–0.07 (89%)attempts 14–5goals 0–0
- Cooke – Morrow – Sutter5:50
xG 0.08–0.27 (22%)attempts 2–8goals 0–1
- Dupuis – Kunitz – Kennedy6:17
xG 0.20–0.49 (29%)attempts 7–6goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestMurray – Niskanen8:22
xG 0.18–0.06 (74%)attempts 6–5goals 0–0
- Niskanen – Despres4:31
xG 0.09–0.04 (68%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Murray – Orpik2:11
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 2–2goals 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 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, Buffalo Sabres win this game 63% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).