Sun, Mar 23, 2014·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
St. Louis Blues 1, Pittsburgh Penguins 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 53% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| STL | 010 | 08 | 19 | 127 |
| PIT | 010 | 013 | 010 | 033 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P3 11:20STLDavid BackesGWGAssists: Alexander Steen, Alex Pietrangelo · Tip-in, 0.13 xG1–0
Penalties (11)
- P1 11:00STLDavid Backes: Interference2 min
- P1 19:31STLT.J. Oshie: Hooking2 min
- P1 19:53STLJaden Schwartz: Tripping2 min
- P2 4:54PITRobert Bortuzzo: Interference2 min
- P2 12:53STLMaxim Lapierre: Charging2 min
- P2 12:53STLMaxim Lapierre: Roughing2 min
- P2 12:53PITCraig Adams: Roughing2 min
- P3 9:17PITEvgeni Malkin: High sticking2 min
- P3 15:16STLJay Bouwmeester: Tripping2 min
- P3 0:00PITEvgeni Malkin: Roughing2 min
- P3 0:00STLAlex Pietrangelo: 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 20:00Crosby won the faceoff against Sobotka
- 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
- bestSteen – Backes – Oshie10:09
xG 0.59–0.17 (78%)attempts 17–7goals 1–0
- Morrow – Ott – Berglund4:37
xG 0.18–0.03 (84%)attempts 4–6goals 0–0
- Morrow – Berglund – Paajarvi5:56
xG 0.14–0.05 (73%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
- Ott – Sobotka – Schwartz6:05
xG 0.11–0.06 (66%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestJackman – Polak14:08
xG 0.27–0.10 (74%)attempts 12–12goals 0–0
- Colaiacovo – Shattenkirk12:13
xG 0.50–0.33 (60%)attempts 11–19goals 0–0
- Bouwmeester – Pietrangelo17:36
xG 0.56–0.56 (50%)attempts 16–15goals 0–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestJokinen – Malkin – Neal11:03
xG 0.34–0.21 (62%)attempts 15–9goals 0–0
- Goc – Sutter – Gibbons2:46
xG 0.02–0.24 (9%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Kunitz – Stempniak – Crosby10:02
xG 0.16–0.51 (24%)attempts 8–14goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestNiskanen – Maatta12:05
xG 0.35–0.14 (72%)attempts 22–7goals 0–0
- Niskanen – Despres2:38
xG 0.17–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Orpik – Bortuzzo8:44
xG 0.23–0.10 (69%)attempts 9–4goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 53% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − STL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).