Sun, Jan 5, 2014·United Center, Chicago
San Jose Sharks 3, Chicago Blackhawks 2 (SO)
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 | OT | SO | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SJS | 19 | 015 | 115 | 03 | 2 | 342 |
| CHI | 011 | 012 | 29 | 03 | 0 | 235 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:12SJSJason DemersAssists: Logan Couture, Matt Nieto · Slap, 0.04 xG1–0
- P3 1:27CHINiklas HjalmarssonAssists: Jonathan Toews, Patrick Sharp · Slap, 0.07 xG1–1
- P3 4:01CHIMichal RozsivalAssists: Marcus Kruger · Slap, 0.02 xG1–2
- P3 11:10SJSBrent BurnsAssists: Joe Thornton, Marc-Edouard Vlasic · Wrist, 0.16 xG2–2
Shootout
- 1. CHI Jonathan Toews stopped
- 2. SJS Logan Couture scored
- 3. CHI Patrick Sharp stopped
- 4. SJS Joe Pavelski scored
Penalties (1)
- P1 18:46CHIBrandon Bollig: Roughing2 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 20:00Handzus 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 – Couture – Nieto14:06
xG 0.77–0.29 (73%)attempts 16–14goals 1–0
- Desjardins – Kearns – Sheppard13:15
xG 0.43–0.23 (65%)attempts 15–9goals 0–0
- Brown – McCarthy – Hayes5:03
xG 0.20–0.46 (30%)attempts 4–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBoyle – Vlasic12:39
xG 0.57–0.25 (69%)attempts 14–14goals 0–1
- Stuart – Demers11:24
xG 0.26–0.13 (67%)attempts 13–7goals 1–0
- Braun – Irwin13:16
xG 0.50–0.73 (41%)attempts 9–15goals 0–0
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestKane – Shaw – Saad4:17
xG 0.59–0.35 (63%)attempts 7–4goals 0–0
- Handzus – Versteeg – Kane6:21
xG 0.17–0.03 (87%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Handzus – Kane – Saad5:52
xG 0.21–0.14 (60%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Hossa – Sharp – Toews15:30
xG 0.50–0.46 (52%)attempts 21–10goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- bestKeith – Seabrook22:28
xG 1.00–0.77 (56%)attempts 27–17goals 0–0
- Oduya – Hjalmarsson18:38
xG 0.46–0.61 (43%)attempts 12–14goals 1–1
- Rozsival – Leddy13:02
xG 0.22–0.51 (30%)attempts 10–18goals 1–1
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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI 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 (CHI − SJS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).