Sun, Mar 15, 2015·Honda Center, Anaheim
Nashville Predators 2, Anaheim Ducks 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 94% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NSH | 08 | 215 | 04 | 227 |
| ANA | 010 | 03 | 415 | 428 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 1:19NSHTaylor BeckAssists: Gabriel Bourque · Wrist, 0.08 xG1–0
- P2 6:49NSHRoman JosiPPAssists: Shea Weber, Filip Forsberg · Slap, 0.03 xG2–0
- P3 2:12ANARyan GetzlafAssists: Corey Perry, Patrick Maroon · Slap, 0.12 xG2–1
- P3 9:16ANAKyle PalmieriAssists: Hampus Lindholm, Francois Beauchemin · Wrist, 0.08 xG2–2
- P3 9:51ANANate ThompsonGWGAssists: Jakob Silfverberg, Hampus Lindholm · Wrist, 0.10 xG2–3
- P3 14:51ANACam FowlerPPAssists: Patrick Maroon, James Wisniewski · Wrist, 0.03 xG2–4
Penalties (8)
- P1 5:40NSHMike Santorelli: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P1 9:17ANAClayton Stoner: Interference2 min
- P1 13:40NSHMike Fisher: Hooking2 min
- P2 0:59NSHMike Fisher: Fighting5 min
- P2 0:59ANARyan Kesler: Fighting5 min
- P2 3:15ANAJiri Sekac: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 5:39ANAMatt Beleskey: Kneeing2 min · PPG
- P3 13:01NSHMike Ribeiro: Cross checking2 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 20:00Thompson won the faceoff against Gaustad
- 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.
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestRibeiro – Santorelli – Wilson11:57
xG 0.51–0.21 (71%)attempts 13–6goals 0–0
- Gaustad – Beck – Bourque7:23
xG 0.39–0.31 (55%)attempts 8–8goals 1–2
- Cullen – Stalberg – Jarnkrok7:15
xG 0.21–0.23 (48%)attempts 13–3goals 0–0
- Fisher – Smith – Forsberg11:50
xG 0.11–0.61 (16%)attempts 4–10goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestFranson – Jones11:33
xG 0.49–0.25 (66%)attempts 18–8goals 0–0
- Ellis – Ekholm14:53
xG 0.28–0.36 (43%)attempts 8–6goals 0–1
- Weber – Josi17:23
xG 0.55–0.87 (38%)attempts 15–17goals 1–2
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestThompson – Cogliano – Silfverberg6:43
xG 0.74–0.04 (95%)attempts 5–2goals 1–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – Maroon6:06
xG 0.25–0.11 (69%)attempts 7–5goals 1–0
- Kesler – Beleskey – Palmieri6:00
xG 0.18–0.05 (77%)attempts 8–2goals 1–0
- Etem – Rakell – Sekac4:28
xG 0.04–0.06 (44%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBeauchemin – Lindholm17:15
xG 1.07–0.59 (65%)attempts 16–17goals 2–0
- Wisniewski – Stoner12:32
xG 0.27–0.33 (45%)attempts 11–13goals 1–0
- Despres – Fowler12:45
xG 0.12–0.38 (23%)attempts 5–11goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it NSH. 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 94% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − NSH), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).