Tue, Oct 13, 2015·Prudential Center, Newark
Nashville Predators 3, New Jersey Devils 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 70% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NSH | 18 | 04 | 28 | 320 |
| NJD | 010 | 06 | 17 | 123 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:34NSHRoman JosiPPAssists: Shea Weber, Filip Forsberg · Slap, 0.04 xG1–0
- P3 17:21NSHRoman JosiENGWGAssists: Paul Gaustad, Pekka Rinne · Snap, 0.46 xG2–0
- P3 18:20NJDKyle PalmieriPPAssists: Andy Greene, Jacob Josefson · Tip-in, 0.19 xG2–1
- P3 19:08NSHEric NystromENUnassisted · Snap, 0.59 xG3–1
Penalties (4)
- P1 9:51NJDTuomo Ruutu: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P2 5:23NSHMattias Ekholm: Tripping2 min
- P3 7:55NJDJordin Tootoo: Tripping2 min
- P3 17:02NSHCody Hodgson: Holding2 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 20:00Fisher won the faceoff against Henrique
- 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
- bestHodgson – Bourque – Jarnkrok9:33
xG 0.75–0.09 (89%)attempts 8–2goals 0–0
- Ribeiro – Wilson – Smith4:59
xG 0.18–0.09 (66%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Fisher – Neal – Forsberg3:16
xG 0.07–0.02 (77%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Gaustad – Nystrom – Watson8:22
xG 0.08–0.12 (38%)attempts 1–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestWeber – Josi16:19
xG 0.85–0.19 (82%)attempts 9–7goals 0–0
- Jackman – Jones15:24
xG 0.31–0.27 (53%)attempts 12–6goals 0–0
- Ellis – Ekholm16:28
xG 0.11–0.32 (26%)attempts 6–9goals 0–0
New Jersey Devils
Forward lines
- bestRuutu – Gionta – Matteau5:43
xG 0.24–0.08 (76%)attempts 8–1goals 0–0
- Stempniak – Josefson – O'Neill5:19
xG 0.10–0.01 (90%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
- Tlusty – Henrique – Palmieri9:27
xG 0.10–0.06 (63%)attempts 3–3goals 0–0
- Stempniak – Josefson – Matteau3:02
xG 0.04–0.00 (100%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMerrill – Severson6:26
xG 0.27–0.03 (89%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Schlemko – Merrill7:43
xG 0.12–0.06 (69%)attempts 3–4goals 0–0
- Schlemko – Gelinas7:36
xG 0.17–0.15 (53%)attempts 3–5goals 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.
NJD's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NJD 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, Nashville Predators win this game 70% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NJD − NSH), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).