Skip to content
Ice Lab

Wed, Dec 3, 2014·Honda Center, Anaheim

Philadelphia Flyers 4, Anaheim Ducks 5 (SO)

Expected result

Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 51% of the time.

ANA winsPHI wins

By period

Goals and shots on goal in each period.

TeamP1P2P3OTSOTotal
PHI04310113081435
ANA0431916042533

Goals, with shots on goal in grey.

Scoring

Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.

  1. P2 5:46PHIMichael RafflAssists: Claude Giroux, Jakub Voracek · Wrist, 0.18 xG1–0
  2. P2 8:14ANACam FowlerAssists: Jakob Silfverberg, Frederik Andersen · Slap, 0.06 xG1–1
  3. P2 8:46PHIWayne SimmondsAssists: Brayden Schenn, Mark Streit · Wrist, 0.06 xG2–1
  4. P2 10:47PHIR.J. UmbergerPPAssists: Nick Schultz, Sean Couturier · Backhand, 0.19 xG3–1
  5. P2 11:15ANARyan GetzlafAssists: Hampus Lindholm, Corey Perry · Snap, 0.10 xG3–2
  6. P2 19:06ANASami VatanenAssists: Patrick Maroon · Backhand, 0.20 xG3–3
  7. P3 14:58ANAPatrick MaroonPPAssists: Corey Perry, Ryan Getzlaf · Snap, 0.44 xG3–4
  8. P3 19:57PHIWayne SimmondsAssists: Scott Laughton, Andrew MacDonald · Tip-in, 0.26 xG4–4

Shootout

  1. 1. PHI Jakub Voracek stopped
  2. 2. ANA Jakob Silfverberg scored
  3. 3. PHI Sean Couturier scored
  4. 4. ANA Corey Perry scored
  5. 5. PHI Claude Giroux stopped
Penalties (9)
  1. P1 1:10ANARene Bourque: Hooking2 min
  2. P1 3:35PHIChris VandeVelde: Hooking2 min
  3. P1 10:07PHIAndrew MacDonald: Interference2 min
  4. P2 1:05PHIMark Streit: Slashing2 min
  5. P2 6:25PHIWayne Simmonds: Roughing2 min
  6. P2 6:25ANACorey Perry: Roughing2 min
  7. P2 8:59ANAMat Clark: Elbowing2 min · PPG
  8. P2 13:07PHIZac Rinaldo: Slashing2 min
  9. P3 13:20PHIAndrew MacDonald: Delaying game2 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.

PHI00 SOG · 0.0 xG

20:00

P1

0.0 xG · 0 SOG0ANA
46% to win54% to win
← PHI attackANA attack →
  1. P1 20:00Giroux won the faceoff against Smith-Pelly
  • Goal
  • Shot
  • Miss
  • Block
  • Hit
  • Takeaway
  • Giveaway
  • Faceoff
  • Penalty

The numbers

Team totals, side by side.

PHIANA
35Shots on goal33
3.7Expected goals3.8
56Shot attempts76
30Faceoffs won36
2Power plays5
12Penalty minutes6
27Hits30
20Blocked shots7
11Giveaways10
9Takeaways7

Line combinations that worked

Model-based

Each team's forward lines and defence pairs at 5-on-5 (two minutes or more together), best first by expected goals for minus against.

Philadelphia Flyers

Forward lines

  1. bestGiroux – Voracek – Raffl12:03

    xG 0.90–0.54 (63%)attempts 15–10goals 1–0

  2. Umberger – Read – Couturier7:18

    xG 0.04–0.06 (40%)attempts 2–5goals 0–0

  3. VandeVelde – Rinaldo – Bellemare6:05

    xG 0.20–0.25 (44%)attempts 4–7goals 0–0

  4. Simmonds – Schenn – Laughton8:18

    xG 0.40–0.47 (46%)attempts 8–9goals 1–2

Defence pairs

  1. bestSchultz – Coburn12:58

    xG 0.71–0.27 (72%)attempts 10–12goals 0–0

  2. Streit – MacDonald4:40

    xG 0.27–0.46 (37%)attempts 4–6goals 1–0

  3. MacDonald – Schenn6:27

    xG 0.19–0.42 (30%)attempts 6–8goals 0–1

Anaheim Ducks

Forward lines

  1. bestJackman – Kesler – Maroon2:57

    xG 0.37–0.06 (86%)attempts 7–2goals 1–0

  2. Jackman – Thompson – Maroon4:36

    xG 0.26–0.03 (90%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0

  3. Cogliano – Silfverberg – Smith-Pelly9:18

    xG 0.49–0.26 (65%)attempts 10–6goals 0–0

  4. Getzlaf – Perry – Beleskey9:57

    xG 0.29–0.29 (50%)attempts 10–3goals 1–0

Defence pairs

  1. bestStoner – Vatanen9:13

    xG 0.71–0.24 (75%)attempts 14–7goals 1–1

  2. Vatanen – Lindholm2:51

    xG 0.12–0.01 (91%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0

  3. Fowler – Manson12:19

    xG 0.61–0.52 (54%)attempts 11–9goals 0–1

How the game flowed

Model-based

Chance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.

Expected goals flow

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.

ANA 3.8 xGPHI 3.7 xG
01234P1P2P3OTEndxG

Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute

ANAPHI

Win probability

Model-based

How each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.

Win probability

ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it PHI. Dots are goals.

Excitement 98/100 · #24 of 1230 this seasonSwing 2.97 · 8 goals in reach · 2-goal lead cutComeback index 15% (winner's lowest chance)
PHI 100%5050%50ANA 100%P1P2P3OTEndBiggest swing +48 pts

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 51% of the time.

ANA winsPHI wins

Simulated goal difference (ANA − PHI), 10,000 replays

-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
+1
+2
+3
+4
+5
+6
+7

The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).