Wed, Feb 11, 2015·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
Detroit Red Wings 1, Pittsburgh Penguins 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 56% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DET | 06 | 19 | 09 | 124 |
| PIT | 28 | 29 | 04 | 421 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 1:51PITPatric HornqvistAssists: Kris Letang, Blake Comeau · Wrist, 0.09 xG0–1
- P1 12:15PITBlake ComeauGWGAssists: Patric Hornqvist · Snap, 0.19 xG0–2
- P2 3:04PITDavid PerronAssists: Maxim Lapierre, Paul Martin · Wrist, 0.35 xG0–3
- P2 7:52PITNick SpalingAssists: Rob Scuderi, Simon Despres · Tip-in, 0.07 xG0–4
- P2 13:26DETStephen WeissPPAssists: Henrik Zetterberg, Niklas Kronwall · Tip-in, 0.32 xG1–4
Penalties (3)
- P1 3:10DETBrendan Smith: Holding2 min
- P2 13:02PITSteve Downie: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P2 16:05DETJonathan Ericsson: Hooking2 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 20:00Crosby won the faceoff against Datsyuk
- 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.
Detroit Red Wings
Forward lines
- bestMiller – Andersson – Jurco3:22
xG 0.18–0.00 (100%)attempts 3–0goals 0–0
- Nyquist – Tatar – Sheahan6:17
xG 0.23–0.09 (71%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Weiss – Helm – Jurco4:35
xG 0.19–0.17 (52%)attempts 7–2goals 0–0
- Datsyuk – Zetterberg – Abdelkader8:15
xG 0.18–0.17 (50%)attempts 9–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestQuincey – DeKeyser16:46
xG 0.44–0.20 (68%)attempts 14–7goals 0–0
- Ericsson – Smith9:42
xG 0.44–0.25 (64%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Kronwall – Marchenko9:43
xG 0.36–0.37 (49%)attempts 9–6goals 0–1
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestMalkin – Comeau – Hornqvist9:55
xG 0.66–0.44 (60%)attempts 9–9goals 2–0
- Kunitz – Crosby – Perron12:56
xG 0.56–0.42 (57%)attempts 10–12goals 0–0
- Adams – Sutter – Spaling2:44
xG 0.11–0.02 (86%)attempts 2–1goals 0–0
- Sutter – Spaling – Bennett7:43
xG 0.08–0.13 (37%)attempts 2–4goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestMartin – Letang18:53
xG 1.12–0.79 (59%)attempts 11–19goals 2–0
- Scuderi – Despres18:23
xG 0.41–0.36 (53%)attempts 12–12goals 1–0
- Bortuzzo – Pouliot12:42
xG 0.31–0.54 (37%)attempts 6–13goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it DET. 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 56% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − DET), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).