Tue, Oct 21, 2014·Scotiabank Saddledome, Calgary
Tampa Bay Lightning 2, Calgary Flames 1 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 54% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 05 | 07 | 17 | 13 | 222 |
| CGY | 08 | 07 | 16 | 01 | 122 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P3 1:12CGYDennis WidemanPPAssists: Johnny Gaudreau, Kris Russell · Wrist, 0.11 xG0–1
- P3 17:44TBLValtteri FilppulaAssists: Jason Garrison, Jonathan Drouin · Wrist, 0.46 xG1–1
- OT 3:00TBLOndrej PalatGWGAssists: Anton Stralman, Tyler Johnson · Backhand, 0.25 xG2–1
Penalties (4)
- P1 18:12CGYMark Giordano: Fighting5 min
- P1 18:12TBLJT Brown: Fighting5 min
- P2 10:55TBLMike Blunden: Tripping2 min
- P2 19:26TBLValtteri Filppula: Interference2 min · PPG
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 20:00Boyle won the faceoff against Stajan
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestFilppula – Stamkos – Drouin17:19
xG 0.78–0.37 (68%)attempts 14–9goals 1–0
- Johnson – Connolly – Palat12:29
xG 0.56–0.24 (70%)attempts 18–4goals 0–0
- Kucherov – Namestnikov – Brown6:40
xG 0.06–0.11 (36%)attempts 1–6goals 0–0
- Morrow – Boyle – Blunden8:01
xG 0.15–0.53 (22%)attempts 4–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestGarrison – Sustr18:29
xG 0.69–0.47 (60%)attempts 13–10goals 0–0
- Brewer – Barberio15:54
xG 0.29–0.16 (65%)attempts 13–7goals 0–0
- Carle – Stralman17:45
xG 0.33–0.70 (32%)attempts 16–14goals 0–0
Calgary Flames
Forward lines
- bestStajan – Bouma – Bollig9:19
xG 0.31–0.13 (71%)attempts 7–3goals 0–0
- Raymond – Gaudreau – Monahan10:03
xG 0.21–0.09 (70%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- Hudler – Byron – Backlund11:09
xG 0.44–0.47 (49%)attempts 7–8goals 0–0
- Glencross – Colborne – Jooris11:10
xG 0.01–0.57 (2%)attempts 2–8goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestEngelland – Smid12:46
xG 0.63–0.27 (70%)attempts 10–7goals 0–0
- Wideman – Smid2:26
xG 0.02–0.17 (11%)attempts 1–7goals 0–0
- Wideman – Russell16:25
xG 0.35–0.55 (39%)attempts 7–11goals 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.
CGY's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CGY is favoured, below it TBL. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 54% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CGY − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).