Thu, Nov 6, 2014·SAP Center at San Jose, San Jose
Vancouver Canucks 3, San Jose Sharks 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 89% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VAN | 18 | 24 | 07 | 319 |
| SJS | 115 | 17 | 014 | 236 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:26SJSJames SheppardAssists: Tomas Hertl, Tyler Kennedy · Deflected, 0.19 xG0–1
- P1 19:52VANRadim VrbataUnassisted · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–1
- P2 10:43SJSLogan CouturePPAssists: Joe Pavelski, Patrick Marleau · Deflected, 0.20 xG1–2
- P2 12:45VANAlexander EdlerPPAssists: Daniel Sedin, Henrik Sedin · Slap, 0.03 xG2–2
- P2 17:20VANNick BoninoGWGAssists: Alexandre Burrows · Wrist, 0.09 xG3–2
Penalties (7)
- P1 8:20SJSAndrew Desjardins: Fighting5 min
- P1 8:20VANDerek Dorsett: Fighting5 min
- P1 11:14VANDaniel Sedin: Holding2 min
- P2 0:54VANChris Tanev: Hooking2 min
- P2 10:32VANDerek Dorsett: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P2 11:20SJSTyler Kennedy: High sticking2 min · PPG
- P3 13:08VANJannik Hansen: Interference2 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 20:00Bonino won the faceoff against Thornton
- 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.
Vancouver Canucks
Forward lines
- bestHansen – Dorsett – Horvat5:11
xG 0.33–0.10 (76%)attempts 4–8goals 0–0
- Richardson – Hansen – Dorsett2:31
xG 0.00–0.01 (0%)attempts 0–2goals 0–0
- Higgins – Burrows – Bonino12:00
xG 0.12–0.61 (17%)attempts 4–16goals 1–0
- Sedin – Sedin – Vrbata14:01
xG 0.24–0.82 (23%)attempts 6–16goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- Edler – Tanev14:56
xG 0.05–0.20 (19%)attempts 4–14goals 0–0
- Bieksa – Stanton17:28
xG 0.39–1.11 (26%)attempts 6–23goals 1–0
- Hamhuis – Sbisa16:34
xG 0.33–1.12 (23%)attempts 9–25goals 0–1
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestMarleau – Couture – Wingels11:45
xG 0.74–0.02 (98%)attempts 12–1goals 0–0
- Thornton – Pavelski – Nieto10:15
xG 0.72–0.16 (82%)attempts 19–4goals 0–1
- Kennedy – Sheppard – Hertl10:41
xG 0.50–0.20 (72%)attempts 15–5goals 1–1
- Marleau – Wingels – Nieto2:10
xG 0.02–0.00 (100%)attempts 1–0goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestVlasic – Braun18:09
xG 1.19–0.11 (92%)attempts 21–4goals 1–0
- Burns – Mueller14:17
xG 0.50–0.15 (77%)attempts 24–4goals 0–1
- Hannan – Demers13:58
xG 0.65–0.40 (62%)attempts 15–8goals 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.
SJS's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line SJS is favoured, below it VAN. 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 89% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (SJS − VAN), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).