Thu, Oct 24, 2013·TD Garden, Boston
San Jose Sharks 1, Boston Bruins 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 69% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SJS | 016 | 09 | 114 | 139 |
| BOS | 03 | 17 | 17 | 217 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 18:48BOSJarome IginlaAssists: David Krejci, Dennis Seidenberg · Wrist, 0.22 xG0–1
- P3 0:18SJSPatrick MarleauAssists: Marc-Edouard Vlasic · Snap, 0.45 xG1–1
- P3 19:59BOSDavid KrejciGWGAssists: Adam McQuaid, Milan Lucic · Tip-in, 0.14 xG1–2
Penalties (2)
- P1 0:41BOSJarome Iginla: Roughing2 min
- P3 4:35SJSJoe Thornton: 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 20:00Krejci won the faceoff against Couture
- 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
- bestMarleau – Kennedy – Couture14:45
xG 1.21–0.39 (76%)attempts 20–10goals 1–1
- Pavelski – Hamilton – Nieto2:33
xG 0.18–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–0goals 0–0
- Pavelski – Wingels – Nieto2:16
xG 0.02–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Pavelski – McCarthy – Nieto10:01
xG 0.24–0.26 (48%)attempts 11–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestVlasic – Braun19:20
xG 1.50–0.52 (74%)attempts 28–8goals 1–2
- Hannan – Demers16:40
xG 0.51–0.12 (81%)attempts 21–11goals 0–0
- Stuart – Irwin15:19
xG 0.40–0.61 (39%)attempts 12–17goals 0–0
Boston Bruins
Forward lines
- Thornton – Campbell – Paille8:16
xG 0.12–0.17 (41%)attempts 5–9goals 0–0
- Bergeron – Marchand – Smith13:07
xG 0.47–0.52 (47%)attempts 11–17goals 0–0
- Kelly – Soderberg – Caron10:48
xG 0.07–0.44 (14%)attempts 5–13goals 0–0
- Iginla – Krejci – Lucic12:55
xG 0.51–1.17 (30%)attempts 9–13goals 2–1
Defence pairs
- bestSeidenberg – McQuaid2:29
xG 0.14–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–1goals 1–0
- Boychuk – Krug3:08
xG 0.10–0.01 (92%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
- Chara – Boychuk14:40
xG 0.39–0.42 (48%)attempts 10–13goals 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.
BOS's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line BOS 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 69% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (BOS − SJS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).