Sat, Nov 22, 2014·Verizon Center, Washington
Buffalo Sabres 2, Washington Capitals 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Buffalo Sabres win this game 59% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BUF | 04 | 110 | 112 | 226 |
| WSH | 011 | 020 | 113 | 144 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 10:15BUFMatt MoulsonAssists: Tyler Ennis, Zemgus Girgensons · Wrist, 0.43 xG1–0
- P3 5:54WSHMatt NiskanenPPAssists: Nicklas Backstrom, Marcus Johansson · Slap, 0.05 xG1–1
- P3 12:18BUFTorrey MitchellGWGAssists: Brian Gionta, Mike Weber · Wrist, 0.41 xG2–1
Penalties (4)
- P1 17:18WSHMichael Latta: Fighting5 min
- P1 17:18BUFMarcus Foligno: Fighting5 min
- P3 5:26BUFMike Weber: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P3 15:32WSHNicklas Backstrom: Tripping2 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 20:00Backstrom won the faceoff against Girgensons
- 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.
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestGionta – Mitchell – Flynn11:03
xG 0.93–0.31 (75%)attempts 11–14goals 1–0
- Stafford – Hodgson – Deslauriers12:22
xG 0.78–0.65 (54%)attempts 11–17goals 0–0
- Moulson – Ennis – Girgensons12:51
xG 0.71–0.66 (52%)attempts 9–15goals 1–0
- McCormick – Stewart – Foligno4:10
xG 0.03–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMeszaros – Weber13:59
xG 1.09–0.46 (70%)attempts 8–13goals 1–0
- Ristolainen – Zadorov16:54
xG 1.24–0.71 (64%)attempts 20–17goals 1–0
- Strachan – Meszaros3:24
xG 0.00–0.28 (0%)attempts 0–8goals 0–0
Washington Capitals
Forward lines
- bestOvechkin – Backstrom – Wilson16:58
xG 0.86–0.19 (82%)attempts 33–8goals 0–0
- Fehr – Brouwer – Johansson3:03
xG 0.29–0.07 (80%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
- Fehr – Latta – Kuznetsov5:23
xG 0.08–0.12 (38%)attempts 6–4goals 0–0
- Chimera – Ward – Beagle10:53
xG 0.90–1.18 (43%)attempts 11–11goals 0–2
Defence pairs
- bestNiskanen – Alzner14:26
xG 0.66–0.26 (72%)attempts 17–6goals 0–0
- Orpik – Carlson17:41
xG 1.31–1.12 (54%)attempts 27–15goals 0–1
- Green – Schmidt10:30
xG 0.36–0.19 (65%)attempts 12–10goals 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.
WSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line WSH is favoured, below it BUF. 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, Buffalo Sabres win this game 59% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (WSH − BUF), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).