Sat, Feb 21, 2015·Gila River Arena, Glendale
Tampa Bay Lightning 4, Arizona Coyotes 2
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 68% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 010 | 210 | 27 | 427 |
| ARI | 17 | 03 | 114 | 224 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 14:02ARIMichael StoneAssists: Martin Erat, Lauri Korpikoski · Wrist, 0.03 xG0–1
- P2 6:45TBLOndrej PalatPPAssists: Ryan Callahan, Anton Stralman · Slap, 0.06 xG1–1
- P2 14:31TBLRyan CallahanAssists: Mark Barberio, Anton Stralman · Wrist, 0.23 xG2–1
- P3 3:27TBLOndrej PalatGWGAssists: Victor Hedman · Wrist, 0.10 xG3–1
- P3 11:42ARIMark ArcobelloUnassisted · Wrist, 0.11 xG3–2
- P3 19:55TBLSteven StamkosENAssists: Valtteri Filppula, Jason Garrison · Wrist, 0.57 xG4–2
Penalties (6)
- P1 1:01ARIOliver Ekman-Larsson: Tripping2 min
- P1 7:51TBLJason Garrison: Hooking2 min
- P1 16:34ARIMark Arcobello: Tripping2 min
- P2 3:40ARIDavid Moss: High sticking double minor4 min · PPG
- P3 16:44ARIOliver Ekman-Larsson: Holding2 min
- P3 19:19ARIKeith Yandle: Tripping2 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.
20:00
P1
- P1 20:00Johnson won the faceoff against Arcobello
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestJohnson – Palat – Kucherov11:08
xG 0.82–0.23 (78%)attempts 13–9goals 1–0
- Callahan – Killorn – Stamkos10:11
xG 0.69–0.52 (57%)attempts 13–10goals 1–1
- Boyle – Brown – Drouin7:36
xG 0.16–0.07 (71%)attempts 9–4goals 0–0
- Filppula – Connolly – Paquette8:21
xG 0.03–0.37 (7%)attempts 4–9goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestStralman – Barberio8:30
xG 0.56–0.37 (60%)attempts 11–6goals 1–0
- Stralman – Garrison2:46
xG 0.17–0.07 (71%)attempts 4–4goals 0–0
- Barberio – Sustr3:28
xG 0.04–0.02 (62%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestGagner – Arcobello – Martinook7:09
xG 0.40–0.15 (73%)attempts 12–5goals 0–0
- Vitale – Gagner – Rieder2:01
xG 0.09–0.03 (72%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
- Moss – Vitale – Rieder4:23
xG 0.03–0.00 (100%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Erat – Chipchura – Lessio8:27
xG 0.10–0.08 (56%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestStone – Gormley7:30
xG 0.42–0.12 (79%)attempts 8–6goals 2–0
- Stone – Ekman-Larsson3:07
xG 0.31–0.13 (70%)attempts 8–2goals 0–1
- Ekman-Larsson – Murphy13:55
xG 0.46–0.42 (52%)attempts 10–9goals 0–1
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.
ARI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ARI is favoured, below it TBL. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 68% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ARI − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).