Thu, Oct 29, 2015·Amalie Arena, Tampa
Colorado Avalanche 2, Tampa Bay Lightning 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 52% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COL | 110 | 111 | 05 | 226 |
| TBL | 09 | 113 | 013 | 135 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 15:57COLAlex TanguayAssists: Jarome Iginla, Nathan MacKinnon · Tip-in, 0.09 xG1–0
- P2 13:04COLNathan MacKinnonGWGAssists: Jarome Iginla, Alex Tanguay · Wrist, 0.10 xG2–0
- P2 15:46TBLAlex KillornPPAssists: Victor Hedman, Valtteri Filppula · Wrist, 0.30 xG2–1
Penalties (12)
- P1 2:11COLMikhail Grigorenko: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P1 4:50COLNikita Zadorov: Interference2 min
- P1 12:10TBLMatt Carle: Holding2 min
- P1 18:10TBLBrian Boyle: Hooking2 min
- P2 1:37TBLJonathan Marchessault: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 15:09COLGabriel Landeskog: Slashing2 min · PPG
- P2 18:51TBLVictor Hedman: Holding2 min
- P3 0:35TBLValtteri Filppula: Holding2 min
- P3 0:58COLCarl Soderberg: Cross checking2 min
- P3 0:58TBLTyler Johnson: Interference goalkeeper2 min
- P3 4:27TBLAnton Stralman: Interference2 min
- P3 13:18COLMatt Duchene: Delaying game puck over glass2 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 20:00Johnson won the faceoff against Duchene
- 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.
Colorado Avalanche
Forward lines
- bestIginla – Tanguay – MacKinnon10:23
xG 0.64–0.23 (73%)attempts 12–12goals 2–0
- Mitchell – McLeod – Grigorenko6:32
xG 0.26–0.01 (97%)attempts 4–4goals 0–0
- Skille – Duchene – Landeskog8:39
xG 0.16–0.20 (44%)attempts 6–12goals 0–0
- Comeau – Soderberg – Everberg6:18
xG 0.10–0.16 (39%)attempts 5–9goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestHolden – Barrie10:00
xG 0.60–0.03 (95%)attempts 14–4goals 0–0
- Beauchemin – Johnson12:50
xG 0.34–0.31 (52%)attempts 10–17goals 0–0
- Holden – Zadorov2:04
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 0–1goals 0–0
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestCallahan – Killorn – Stamkos12:13
xG 0.36–0.18 (66%)attempts 18–7goals 0–0
- Condra – Namestnikov – Marchessault2:36
xG 0.19–0.03 (86%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Filppula – Boyle – Marchessault2:19
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 1–0goals 0–0
- Boyle – Marchessault – Brown2:21
xG 0.00–0.01 (0%)attempts 1–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Stralman – Hedman11:23
xG 0.19–0.19 (50%)attempts 17–6goals 0–0
- Coburn – Sustr9:10
xG 0.13–0.24 (34%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
- Carle – Garrison11:57
xG 0.08–0.39 (17%)attempts 9–9goals 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.
TBL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line TBL is favoured, below it COL. 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, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 52% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (TBL − COL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).