Sat, Feb 1, 2014·Honda Center, Anaheim
Dallas Stars 2, Anaheim Ducks 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Dallas Stars win this game 78% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DAL | 09 | 112 | 16 | 227 |
| ANA | 06 | 08 | 012 | 026 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 5:03DALTrevor DaleyGWGAssists: Cody Eakin, Rich Peverley · Wrist, 0.28 xG1–0
- P3 19:31DALJamie BennENAssists: Tyler Seguin · Wrist, 0.62 xG2–0
Penalties (8)
- P1 8:08DALAlex Goligoski: Interference2 min
- P1 19:02ANABen Lovejoy: Interference2 min
- P2 6:58ANALuca Sbisa: Holding2 min
- P2 12:41ANACorey Perry: Hooking2 min
- P2 0:00DALAntoine Roussel: Roughing2 min
- P2 0:00ANALuca Sbisa: Roughing2 min
- P3 4:17DALCody Eakin: Hooking2 min
- P3 11:21DALJordie Benn: 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 20:00Fiddler won the faceoff against Koivu
- 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.
Dallas Stars
Forward lines
- bestCole – Peverley – Eakin5:45
xG 0.79–0.13 (86%)attempts 9–7goals 1–0
- Fiddler – Roussel – Garbutt8:39
xG 0.22–0.11 (66%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0
- Benn – Seguin – Nichushkin10:17
xG 0.22–0.17 (56%)attempts 5–5goals 0–0
- Whitney – Horcoff – Chiasson6:04
xG 0.02–0.37 (6%)attempts 2–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestDaley – Goligoski12:47
xG 0.90–0.18 (83%)attempts 12–10goals 1–0
- Benn – Dillon14:23
xG 0.59–0.31 (65%)attempts 14–8goals 0–0
- Gonchar – Connauton9:44
xG 0.32–0.29 (52%)attempts 8–12goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestGetzlaf – Perry – Silfverberg3:11
xG 0.31–0.00 (100%)attempts 8–0goals 0–0
- Koivu – Winnik – Cogliano10:07
xG 0.23–0.18 (56%)attempts 7–9goals 0–0
- Selanne – Perreault – Maroon3:14
xG 0.06–0.03 (63%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Selanne – Perreault – Silfverberg6:01
xG 0.26–0.24 (52%)attempts 3–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestLovejoy – Sbisa2:10
xG 0.17–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 0–0
- Sbisa – Lindholm3:09
xG 0.12–0.06 (68%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
- Beauchemin – Sbisa2:15
xG 0.08–0.05 (59%)attempts 3–3goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it DAL. 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, Dallas Stars win this game 78% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − DAL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).