Fri, Nov 7, 2014·Honda Center, Anaheim
Arizona Coyotes 3, Anaheim Ducks 2 (SO)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 82% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | SO | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI | 07 | 210 | 06 | 02 | 2 | 325 |
| ANA | 211 | 013 | 012 | 03 | 1 | 239 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 5:02ANARyan GetzlafPPAssists: Sami Vatanen, Devante Smith-Pelly · Slap, 0.15 xG0–1
- P1 8:49ANAMatt BeleskeyAssists: Jakob Silfverberg, Ryan Kesler · Wrist, 0.34 xG0–2
- P2 3:55ARIRob KlinkhammerAssists: Martin Hanzal, Martin Erat · Tip-in, 0.13 xG1–2
- P2 4:53ARIShane DoanAssists: Antoine Vermette, Keith Yandle · Snap, 0.07 xG2–2
Shootout
- 1. ANA Jakob Silfverberg scored
- 2. ARI Sam Gagner scored
- 3. ANA Devante Smith-Pelly stopped
- 4. ARI Mikkel Boedker scored
- 5. ANA Ryan Kesler stopped
Penalties (7)
- P1 4:16ARISam Gagner: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P1 10:45ANARyan Getzlaf: Tripping2 min
- P2 17:02ANAFrederik Andersen: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P3 2:55ARIConnor Murphy: High sticking2 min
- P3 5:39ARIConnor Murphy: Hooking2 min
- P3 6:26ANADevante Smith-Pelly: Holding2 min
- P3 9:26ARIB.J. Crombeen: 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 20:00Hanzal won the faceoff against Getzlaf
- 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.
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestErat – Hanzal – Klinkhammer11:26
xG 0.30–0.17 (64%)attempts 14–9goals 1–0
- Korpikoski – Gagner – Boedker12:29
xG 0.55–0.58 (49%)attempts 10–14goals 0–0
- Crombeen – Vitale – McMillan6:25
xG 0.36–0.45 (45%)attempts 8–6goals 0–0
- Doan – Vermette – Rieder11:30
xG 0.16–0.85 (15%)attempts 6–14goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- bestMichalek – Ekman-Larsson18:26
xG 0.69–0.57 (55%)attempts 16–16goals 1–0
- Stone – Gormley7:46
xG 0.18–0.13 (58%)attempts 7–7goals 0–0
- Yandle – Murphy15:48
xG 0.40–1.45 (22%)attempts 13–18goals 1–1
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestKesler – Beleskey – Silfverberg10:01
xG 1.12–0.21 (84%)attempts 17–5goals 1–0
- Cogliano – Etem – Karlsson7:40
xG 0.55–0.20 (73%)attempts 10–5goals 0–0
- Jackman – Thompson – Rakell6:16
xG 0.22–0.17 (56%)attempts 2–6goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Maroon – Smith-Pelly10:16
xG 0.10–0.29 (26%)attempts 6–11goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestAllen – Vatanen14:50
xG 1.60–0.37 (81%)attempts 26–10goals 1–0
- Beauchemin – Lindholm17:47
xG 0.57–0.37 (61%)attempts 14–15goals 0–1
- Stoner – Fowler9:51
xG 0.23–0.34 (40%)attempts 8–11goals 0–1
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 ARI. 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 82% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − ARI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).