Sat, Mar 14, 2015·First Niagara Center, Buffalo
New York Rangers 2, Buffalo Sabres 0
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, New York Rangers win this game 84% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NYR | 08 | 010 | 215 | 233 |
| BUF | 07 | 07 | 06 | 020 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P3 7:31NYRKeith YandleGWGAssists: Martin St. Louis, Chris Kreider · Slap, 0.04 xG1–0
- P3 19:27NYRMartin St. LouisENUnassisted · Wrist, 0.58 xG2–0
Penalties (8)
- P1 14:50BUFAndrej Meszaros: Hooking2 min
- P2 1:17NYRDerick Brassard: Roughing2 min
- P2 8:12NYRMatt Hunwick: Hooking2 min
- P2 17:20BUFNicolas Deslauriers: Fighting5 min
- P2 17:20NYRTanner Glass: Fighting5 min
- P3 0:26BUFPhil Varone: Tripping2 min
- P3 4:59NYRJ.T. Miller: Hooking2 min
- P3 15:33BUFNikita Zadorov: 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 20:00Hayes won the faceoff against Varone
- 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.
New York Rangers
Forward lines
- bestNash – Brassard – Zuccarello9:34
xG 0.36–0.03 (91%)attempts 12–1goals 0–0
- St. Louis – Stepan – Kreider10:08
xG 0.28–0.03 (91%)attempts 9–3goals 1–0
- Moore – Glass – Fast5:20
xG 0.19–0.02 (92%)attempts 8–1goals 0–0
- Hagelin – Hayes – Fast3:17
xG 0.09–0.00 (100%)attempts 5–0goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHunwick – Staal3:54
xG 0.30–0.00 (100%)attempts 7–0goals 0–0
- Hunwick – Yandle9:31
xG 0.31–0.05 (87%)attempts 16–2goals 1–0
- Boyle – Yandle3:40
xG 0.15–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–0goals 0–0
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestGionta – Foligno – Varone11:11
xG 0.35–0.12 (75%)attempts 7–8goals 0–0
- Moulson – Ennis – Larsson12:30
xG 0.27–0.23 (55%)attempts 8–12goals 0–0
- Ellis – Dalpe – D'Amigo5:08
xG 0.00–0.09 (0%)attempts 0–5goals 0–0
- Hodgson – Deslauriers – Schaller6:58
xG 0.00–0.29 (0%)attempts 0–10goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Benoit – Ristolainen2:03
xG 0.01–0.13 (8%)attempts 1–5goals 0–0
- Benoit – Strachan9:52
xG 0.16–0.29 (35%)attempts 4–9goals 0–1
- Weber – Ristolainen17:31
xG 0.28–0.43 (40%)attempts 7–20goals 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.
BUF's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line BUF is favoured, below it NYR. 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, New York Rangers win this game 84% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (BUF − NYR), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).