Sun, Dec 29, 2013·SAP Center at San Jose, San Jose
Anaheim Ducks 1, San Jose Sharks 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 65% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 014 | 010 | 17 | 131 |
| SJS | 213 | 16 | 04 | 323 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 1:17SJSBrent BurnsAssists: Joe Pavelski, Joe Thornton · Wrist, 0.21 xG0–1
- P1 10:07SJSLogan CoutureGWGAssists: Brent Burns, Jason Demers · Backhand, 0.10 xG0–2
- P2 9:16SJSBracken KearnsAssists: Andrew Desjardins, Mike Brown · Slap, 0.42 xG0–3
- P3 11:32ANAPatrick MaroonAssists: Corey Perry, Cam Fowler · Snap, 0.11 xG1–3
Penalties (3)
- P1 6:48SJSJoe Pavelski: Interference2 min
- P1 19:40ANAAndrew Cogliano: Cross checking2 min
- P3 8:47ANACorey Perry: Illegal check to head2 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 20:00Couture won the faceoff against Bonino
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestPerry – Perreault – Maroon3:59
xG 0.32–0.15 (69%)attempts 6–4goals 1–0
- Getzlaf – Cogliano – Palmieri3:08
xG 0.02–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Koivu – Winnik – Silfverberg2:46
xG 0.01–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – Palmieri2:16
xG 0.00–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Allen – Fistric9:42
xG 0.10–0.12 (45%)attempts 8–7goals 0–0
- Lovejoy – Fowler17:38
xG 0.67–0.72 (48%)attempts 24–18goals 1–0
- Fistric – Lindholm3:56
xG 0.09–0.19 (32%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestKennedy – Brown – Desjardins4:16
xG 0.31–0.23 (58%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0
- Kennedy – Kearns – Sheppard2:38
xG 0.07–0.01 (83%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
- Brown – Kearns – Sheppard4:39
xG 0.00–0.12 (0%)attempts 0–6goals 0–0
- Marleau – Couture – Nieto13:12
xG 0.32–0.70 (31%)attempts 13–27goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestVlasic – Braun5:34
xG 0.66–0.14 (83%)attempts 6–5goals 1–0
- Stuart – Demers11:51
xG 0.44–0.43 (51%)attempts 11–18goals 1–0
- Stuart – Braun2:26
xG 0.11–0.11 (51%)attempts 2–2goals 0–1
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 ANA. 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 65% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (SJS − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).