Tue, Dec 2, 2014·PNC Arena, Raleigh
Nashville Predators 1, Carolina Hurricanes 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 68% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NSH | 08 | 010 | 115 | 133 |
| CAR | 16 | 013 | 16 | 225 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 18:59CARJeff SkinnerAssists: Andrej Nestrasil, John-Michael Liles · Tip-in, 0.14 xG0–1
- P3 0:55CARVictor RaskGWGAssists: Jeff Skinner · Slap, 0.02 xG0–2
- P3 15:14NSHMike RibeiroAssists: Roman Josi · Backhand, 0.12 xG1–2
Penalties (3)
- P3 2:09NSHMike Fisher: Tripping2 min
- P3 7:38NSHMike Ribeiro: Hooking2 min
- P3 19:00CARRiley Nash: 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 20:00Fisher won the faceoff against Nash
- 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
- bestRibeiro – Neal – Forsberg14:40
xG 0.76–0.14 (84%)attempts 23–9goals 1–0
- Wilson – Smith – Jarnkrok13:27
xG 0.76–0.44 (63%)attempts 14–11goals 0–0
- Cullen – Jokinen – Fisher12:10
xG 0.32–0.18 (64%)attempts 7–10goals 0–0
- Gaustad – Nystrom – Beck6:42
xG 0.08–0.11 (42%)attempts 3–9goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestWeber – Josi23:13
xG 0.74–0.51 (59%)attempts 21–27goals 1–0
- Ellis – Ekholm15:59
xG 0.18–0.15 (54%)attempts 13–10goals 0–0
- Volchenkov – Jones11:47
xG 0.59–0.63 (48%)attempts 11–14goals 0–1
Carolina Hurricanes
Forward lines
- McClement – Dwyer – Boychuk8:53
xG 0.16–0.25 (39%)attempts 7–7goals 0–0
- Staal – Tlusty – Lindholm12:53
xG 0.21–0.38 (35%)attempts 15–13goals 0–1
- Nestrasil – Skinner – Rask12:21
xG 0.44–0.70 (38%)attempts 12–12goals 2–0
- Semin – Gerbe – Nash11:29
xG 0.18–0.68 (21%)attempts 8–13goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Sekera – Faulk16:08
xG 0.39–0.55 (42%)attempts 17–12goals 0–1
- Liles – Gleason14:53
xG 0.57–0.83 (41%)attempts 16–11goals 1–0
- Hainsey – Jordan13:43
xG 0.12–0.45 (21%)attempts 10–18goals 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.
CAR's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CAR 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, Nashville Predators win this game 68% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CAR − NSH), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).