Fri, Apr 4, 2014·Honda Center, Anaheim
Nashville Predators 5, Anaheim Ducks 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 67% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NSH | 49 | 17 | 08 | 524 |
| ANA | 18 | 116 | 05 | 229 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:36NSHColin WilsonAssists: Roman Josi · Tip-in, 0.22 xG1–0
- P1 12:41NSHColin WilsonAssists: Patric Hornqvist, Ryan Ellis · Backhand, 0.12 xG2–0
- P1 13:52NSHMike FisherGWGAssists: Patric Hornqvist, Matt Cullen · Backhand, 0.09 xG3–0
- P1 15:00ANAKyle PalmieriAssists: Patrick Maroon, Mathieu Perreault · Tip-in, 0.11 xG3–1
- P1 17:05NSHPatric HornqvistAssists: Matt Cullen, Mike Fisher · Wrap-around, 0.05 xG4–1
- P2 3:18ANADaniel WinnikAssists: Rickard Rakell · Wrist, 0.26 xG4–2
- P2 16:00NSHMike FisherAssists: Shea Weber, Matt Cullen · Wrist, 0.36 xG5–2
Penalties (7)
- P1 6:28ANASaku Koivu: Holding2 min
- P1 9:50NSHCraig Smith: Interference2 min
- P1 19:08NSHCraig Smith: Tripping2 min
- P2 13:15ANABen Lovejoy: Holding2 min
- P2 16:53NSHRoman Josi: Interference2 min
- P3 17:49ANATim Jackman: Interference2 min
- P3 19:28ANAFrancois Beauchemin: Slashing2 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 20:00Koivu won the faceoff against Jarnkrok
- 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.
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestCullen – Fisher – Hornqvist11:35
xG 0.65–0.39 (63%)attempts 10–13goals 3–0
- Smith – Bourque – Jarnkrok10:04
xG 0.18–0.02 (91%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Stalberg – Spaling – Wilson15:52
xG 0.61–0.67 (48%)attempts 13–16goals 1–0
- Nystrom – Clune – Sissons5:34
xG 0.11–0.49 (18%)attempts 2–7goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestEllis – Ekholm15:21
xG 0.47–0.14 (76%)attempts 8–9goals 1–0
- Weber – Josi19:06
xG 0.71–1.01 (41%)attempts 15–20goals 2–1
- Bartley – Del Zotto11:39
xG 0.22–0.89 (20%)attempts 9–12goals 1–1
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestJackman – Winnik – Rakell10:04
xG 0.68–0.22 (76%)attempts 8–9goals 1–0
- Perreault – Maroon – Palmieri10:37
xG 0.87–0.74 (54%)attempts 13–10goals 1–2
- Getzlaf – Perry – Bonino11:40
xG 0.34–0.22 (61%)attempts 12–7goals 0–1
- Selanne – Koivu – Cogliano11:29
xG 0.15–0.10 (61%)attempts 7–4goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestRobidas – Allen10:39
xG 0.88–0.26 (77%)attempts 12–8goals 1–0
- Lovejoy – Sbisa16:40
xG 0.75–0.51 (60%)attempts 13–14goals 1–1
- Allen – Lindholm5:02
xG 0.00–0.03 (0%)attempts 1–2goals 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 NSH. 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 67% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − NSH), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).