Wed, Mar 4, 2015·Pepsi Center, Denver
Pittsburgh Penguins 1, Colorado Avalanche 3
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 59% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIT | 05 | 011 | 113 | 129 |
| COL | 09 | 29 | 14 | 322 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 0:13COLJarome IginlaPPAssists: Gabriel Landeskog, Tyson Barrie · Slap, 0.03 xG0–1
- P2 14:29COLNathan MacKinnonGWGAssists: Jan Hejda, Gabriel Landeskog · Deflected, 0.11 xG0–2
- P3 9:45PITEvgeni MalkinUnassisted · Wrist, 0.12 xG1–2
- P3 14:57COLGabriel LandeskogAssists: Ryan O'Reilly · Wrist, 0.06 xG1–3
Penalties (4)
- P1 13:51PITBlake Comeau: Interference2 min
- P1 19:23PITBlake Comeau: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P2 6:07COLJan Hejda: Holding2 min
- P3 4:20PITDerrick Pouliot: Interference2 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 Mitchell
- 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.
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestKunitz – Malkin – Comeau12:54
xG 0.83–0.25 (77%)attempts 21–10goals 1–1
- Winnik – Downie – Sutter9:58
xG 0.20–0.03 (85%)attempts 14–4goals 0–0
- Crosby – Hornqvist – Perron11:52
xG 0.45–0.34 (57%)attempts 15–6goals 0–1
- Lapierre – Spaling – Bennett6:39
xG 0.01–0.03 (27%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMartin – Letang17:39
xG 1.05–0.33 (76%)attempts 25–7goals 1–1
- Lovejoy – Pouliot15:55
xG 0.28–0.23 (55%)attempts 14–8goals 0–0
- Scuderi – Cole10:31
xG 0.18–0.16 (54%)attempts 10–6goals 0–0
Colorado Avalanche
Forward lines
- bestO'Reilly – Landeskog – MacKinnon12:20
xG 0.41–0.35 (54%)attempts 11–15goals 2–0
- McLeod – Cliche – Hishon6:53
xG 0.04–0.03 (57%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
- Tanguay – Mitchell – Everberg12:15
xG 0.31–0.59 (35%)attempts 7–16goals 0–0
- Iginla – Caron – Duchene11:41
xG 0.03–0.41 (8%)attempts 4–16goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Hejda – Redmond13:50
xG 0.21–0.30 (42%)attempts 7–15goals 1–0
- Guenin – Barrie14:03
xG 0.24–0.38 (39%)attempts 10–19goals 1–0
- Stuart – Holden13:48
xG 0.35–0.65 (35%)attempts 7–16goals 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.
COL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line COL is favoured, below it PIT. 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 59% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (COL − PIT), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).