Sun, Mar 29, 2015·PNC Arena, Raleigh
Boston Bruins 2, Carolina Hurricanes 1 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Carolina Hurricanes win this game 70% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOS | 110 | 09 | 08 | 13 | 230 |
| CAR | 08 | 112 | 09 | 02 | 131 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 2:21BOSRyan SpoonerAssists: David Pastrnak, Adam McQuaid · Wrist, 0.07 xG1–0
- P2 19:38CARNathan GerbeAssists: Chris Terry, Danny Biega · Wrist, 0.12 xG1–1
- OT 4:23BOSDavid PastrnakGWGAssists: Carl Soderberg, Torey Krug · Slap, 0.16 xG2–1
Penalties (6)
- P1 15:17CARElias Lindholm: High sticking2 min
- P1 16:39BOSCarl Soderberg: Tripping2 min
- P2 9:28BOSChris Kelly: High sticking2 min
- P3 2:54BOSChris Kelly: Tripping2 min
- P3 6:34CARJohn-Michael Liles: Interference2 min
- P3 18:17CARRon Hainsey: Throwing equipment2 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 20:00Staal won the faceoff against Bergeron
- 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.
Boston Bruins
Forward lines
- bestBergeron – Krejci – Marchand11:56
xG 0.45–0.18 (71%)attempts 11–7goals 0–0
- Kelly – Campbell – Talbot8:50
xG 0.29–0.08 (78%)attempts 5–5goals 0–0
- Lucic – Spooner – Pastrnak8:24
xG 0.21–0.40 (35%)attempts 5–11goals 1–0
- Eriksson – Soderberg – Smith10:55
xG 0.43–0.70 (38%)attempts 10–14goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- Chara – Trotman12:27
xG 0.55–0.54 (50%)attempts 12–19goals 0–0
- McQuaid – Bartkowski11:08
xG 0.21–0.25 (46%)attempts 5–12goals 1–0
- Seidenberg – Krug13:32
xG 0.54–0.67 (45%)attempts 10–13goals 0–0
Carolina Hurricanes
Forward lines
- bestSkinner – Rask – Lindholm8:34
xG 0.62–0.17 (78%)attempts 14–5goals 0–0
- Terry – Skinner – Rask4:06
xG 0.21–0.16 (57%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
- Semin – Gerbe – Malone2:48
xG 0.11–0.07 (61%)attempts 4–1goals 0–1
- Semin – Staal – Staal9:38
xG 0.25–0.25 (50%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestBiega – Murphy11:08
xG 0.62–0.17 (79%)attempts 17–7goals 1–1
- Liles – Bellemore13:45
xG 0.71–0.41 (63%)attempts 14–8goals 0–0
- Liles – Biega2:00
xG 0.12–0.00 (100%)attempts 1–0goals 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.
CAR's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CAR is favoured, below it BOS. 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, Carolina Hurricanes win this game 70% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CAR − BOS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).