Thu, Mar 12, 2015·Gila River Arena, Glendale
Chicago Blackhawks 2, Arizona Coyotes 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 87% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHI | 117 | 017 | 110 | 244 |
| ARI | 16 | 06 | 06 | 118 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 4:53ARITobias RiederAssists: Mark Arcobello, Sam Gagner · Wrist, 0.06 xG0–1
- P1 8:10CHIAndrew ShawPPAssists: Duncan Keith, Marian Hossa · Backhand, 0.15 xG1–1
- P3 12:49CHIBrad RichardsPPGWGAssists: Kris Versteeg, Teuvo Teravainen · Wrist, 0.35 xG2–1
Penalties (8)
- P1 6:58ARIMartin Erat: Holding2 min · PPG
- P1 11:12ARIMike Smith: Roughing2 min
- P2 2:43ARIJohn Moore: Boarding2 min
- P2 4:59CHIAndrew Shaw: Boarding2 min
- P2 12:39ARIKyle Chipchura: High sticking double minor4 min
- P3 11:03ARIJohn Moore: Delaying game puck over glass2 min · PPG
- P3 13:44ARIConnor Murphy: Cross checking2 min
- P3 19:22CHIJoakim Nordstrom: Boarding2 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 20:00Vitale won the faceoff against Vermette
- 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. Shift data for this game is incomplete, so treat these as rough.
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestHossa – Versteeg – Toews6:39
xG 0.32–0.26 (55%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- Kruger – Nordstrom – Shaw4:31
xG 0.11–0.06 (65%)attempts 8–1goals 0–1
- Richards – Sharp – Bickell5:44
xG 0.09–0.11 (44%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Vermette – Saad – Teravainen7:47
xG 0.31–0.37 (46%)attempts 13–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestRozsival – Keith7:40
xG 0.48–0.16 (75%)attempts 14–5goals 0–1
- Keith – Hjalmarsson2:13
xG 0.07–0.02 (80%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Oduya – Seabrook2:01
xG 0.10–0.14 (43%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- Crombeen – Cunningham – McGinn3:19
xG 0.08–0.04 (68%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
- Doan – Erat – Chipchura7:01
xG 0.24–0.29 (45%)attempts 6–9goals 0–0
- Gagner – Arcobello – Rieder7:04
xG 0.13–0.22 (36%)attempts 4–8goals 1–0
- Moss – Korpikoski – Vitale6:10
xG 0.21–0.31 (40%)attempts 4–12goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Stone – Ekman-Larsson9:06
xG 0.24–0.22 (53%)attempts 8–11goals 0–0
- Moore – Murphy7:41
xG 0.23–0.23 (50%)attempts 5–8goals 1–0
- Campbell – Dahlbeck8:11
xG 0.19–0.44 (30%)attempts 4–13goals 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.
ARI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ARI is favoured, below it CHI. 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 87% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ARI − CHI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).