Sat, Nov 9, 2013·Joe Louis Arena, Detroit
Tampa Bay Lightning 3, Detroit Red Wings 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 68% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 113 | 18 | 09 | 14 | 334 |
| DET | 17 | 015 | 15 | 00 | 227 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:51DETHenrik ZetterbergUnassisted · Snap, 0.09 xG0–1
- P1 10:11TBLRyan MaloneAssists: Matt Carle, Nate Thompson · Wrist, 0.30 xG1–1
- P2 12:50TBLSteven StamkosAssists: Victor Hedman · Snap, 0.08 xG2–1
- P3 15:48DETHenrik ZetterbergAssists: Danny DeKeyser · Slap, 0.05 xG2–2
- OT 3:51TBLTeddy PurcellGWGAssists: Richard Panik · Snap, 0.18 xG3–2
Penalties (6)
- P1 10:53DETPavel Datsyuk: Interference2 min
- P2 5:09TBLAndrej Sustr: Hooking2 min
- P2 7:22TBLTeddy Purcell: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 8:46TBLNate Thompson: High sticking double minor4 min
- P2 13:33DETKyle Quincey: Hooking2 min
- P3 11:45DETDaniel Cleary: 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 20:00Helm won the faceoff against Filppula
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestFilppula – Purcell – Connolly11:08
xG 0.66–0.12 (84%)attempts 12–7goals 0–1
- St. Louis – Killorn – Stamkos11:24
xG 0.30–0.28 (52%)attempts 10–6goals 0–1
- Johnson – Panik – Palat8:34
xG 0.29–0.51 (37%)attempts 11–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestCarle – Gudas11:45
xG 0.71–0.16 (82%)attempts 11–9goals 1–1
- Barberio – Hedman2:52
xG 0.14–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–0goals 0–0
- Brewer – Sustr7:17
xG 0.23–0.12 (65%)attempts 7–4goals 0–1
Detroit Red Wings
Forward lines
- bestMiller – Abdelkader – Andersson3:54
xG 0.37–0.10 (78%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
- Abdelkader – Helm – Tatar2:03
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 1–0goals 0–0
- Cleary – Eaves – Glendening3:29
xG 0.03–0.05 (38%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Alfredsson – Helm – Tatar7:01
xG 0.31–0.33 (48%)attempts 7–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKindl – Lashoff3:21
xG 0.22–0.09 (72%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
- Kronwall – DeKeyser15:27
xG 0.34–0.30 (53%)attempts 9–11goals 2–0
- Lashoff – Ouellet6:30
xG 0.20–0.22 (48%)attempts 7–6goals 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.
DET's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line DET is favoured, below it TBL. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 68% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (DET − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).