Wed, Jan 7, 2015·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
Boston Bruins 3, Pittsburgh Penguins 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 63% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOS | 18 | 16 | 05 | 15 | 324 |
| PIT | 112 | 014 | 111 | 02 | 239 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:37PITBeau BennettAssists: Evgeni Malkin, Simon Despres · Wrist, 0.13 xG0–1
- P1 17:57BOSZdeno CharaAssists: Reilly Smith, David Krejci · Slap, 0.04 xG1–1
- P2 15:37BOSPatrice BergeronAssists: Daniel Paille, Milan Lucic · Wrist, 0.13 xG2–1
- P3 0:14PITEvgeni MalkinAssists: Christian Ehrhoff · Slap, 0.02 xG2–2
- OT 2:43BOSPatrice BergeronGWGAssists: Milan Lucic, Torey Krug · Tip-in, 0.02 xG3–2
Penalties (6)
- P1 7:26BOSKevan Miller: High sticking2 min
- P1 15:04PITPaul Martin: Tripping2 min
- P2 0:56BOSPatrice Bergeron: Hooking2 min
- P2 6:16BOSBrad Marchand: High sticking2 min
- P2 11:31PITChristian Ehrhoff: Holding2 min
- P3 1:09BOSLoui Eriksson: Holding2 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 20:00Sutter won the faceoff against Bergeron
- 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.
Boston Bruins
Forward lines
- bestPaille – Bergeron – Lucic9:47
xG 0.51–0.24 (68%)attempts 9–6goals 1–0
- Bergeron – Marchand – Griffith2:28
xG 0.10–0.03 (78%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Campbell – Paille – Cunningham2:16
xG 0.00–0.02 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
- Kelly – Campbell – Soderberg3:40
xG 0.00–0.04 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSeidenberg – Miller2:11
xG 0.13–0.07 (66%)attempts 1–5goals 1–0
- Miller – Krug11:14
xG 0.27–0.25 (52%)attempts 7–13goals 0–0
- Chara – Hamilton14:03
xG 0.57–0.83 (41%)attempts 19–19goals 1–2
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestCrosby – Downie – Perron12:19
xG 1.15–0.36 (76%)attempts 15–10goals 0–1
- Malkin – Spaling – Bennett10:16
xG 0.64–0.18 (78%)attempts 14–5goals 2–0
- Adams – Ebbett – Sill5:29
xG 0.00–0.14 (3%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- Kunitz – Sutter – Rust11:08
xG 0.13–0.27 (32%)attempts 11–8goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestScuderi – Despres12:36
xG 0.78–0.27 (74%)attempts 16–7goals 1–0
- Martin – Letang14:34
xG 0.71–0.23 (76%)attempts 13–8goals 0–0
- Ehrhoff – Bortuzzo12:19
xG 0.57–0.42 (58%)attempts 19–11goals 1–1
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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it BOS. 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 63% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − BOS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).