Fri, Feb 28, 2014·Honda Center, Anaheim
St. Louis Blues 0, Anaheim Ducks 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 50% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| STL | 06 | 08 | 04 | 018 |
| ANA | 14 | 011 | 04 | 119 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:39ANAAndrew CoglianoGWGAssists: Saku Koivu, Cam Fowler · Backhand, 0.07 xG0–1
Penalties (10)
- P1 11:40ANACorey Perry: Fighting5 min
- P1 11:40STLDavid Backes: Fighting5 min
- P1 11:40ANACorey Perry: Roughing2 min
- P1 11:47STLPatrik Berglund: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P1 15:31STLRyan Reaves: Roughing2 min
- P2 8:41STLKevin Shattenkirk: Tripping2 min
- P2 11:07ANAMatt Beleskey: Boarding2 min
- P3 2:37ANAMark Fistric: Cross checking2 min
- P3 8:54STLMaxim Lapierre: Diving2 min
- P3 8:54ANAMark Fistric: Cross checking2 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 20:00Backes 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.
St. Louis Blues
Forward lines
- bestLapierre – Reaves – Jaskin6:07
xG 0.42–0.08 (84%)attempts 12–3goals 0–0
- Berglund – Paajarvi – Schwartz8:17
xG 0.36–0.12 (75%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
- Berglund – Paajarvi – Tarasenko3:43
xG 0.08–0.13 (38%)attempts 8–2goals 0–0
- Morrow – Roy – Tarasenko7:15
xG 0.15–0.32 (32%)attempts 5–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestJackman – Shattenkirk10:01
xG 0.61–0.19 (76%)attempts 20–2goals 0–0
- Colaiacovo – Polak7:03
xG 0.46–0.22 (68%)attempts 11–8goals 0–1
- Colaiacovo – Shattenkirk3:00
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 1–0goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestKoivu – Winnik – Cogliano12:37
xG 0.42–0.31 (58%)attempts 8–12goals 1–0
- Selanne – Perreault – Maroon5:57
xG 0.12–0.19 (39%)attempts 4–8goals 0–0
- Jackman – Beleskey – Bonino5:30
xG 0.22–0.30 (42%)attempts 3–12goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – Penner12:28
xG 0.31–0.51 (38%)attempts 7–15goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestLovejoy – Fowler13:29
xG 0.65–0.25 (72%)attempts 13–12goals 1–0
- Allen – Fistric15:20
xG 0.40–0.55 (42%)attempts 8–18goals 0–0
- Beauchemin – Fowler2:05
xG 0.00–0.17 (0%)attempts 0–4goals 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 STL. 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 50% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − STL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).