Wed, Nov 25, 2015·Gila River Arena, Glendale
Anaheim Ducks 2, Arizona Coyotes 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Arizona Coyotes win this game 85% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 010 | 010 | 211 | 231 |
| ARI | 16 | 114 | 214 | 434 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:14ARIMichael StoneAssists: Kyle Chipchura · Slap, 0.03 xG0–1
- P2 5:25ARIAntoine VermettePPAssists: Mikkel Boedker, Max Domi · Wrist, 0.42 xG0–2
- P3 0:38ANARyan KeslerPPAssists: Sami Vatanen, Corey Perry · Slap, 0.04 xG1–2
- P3 1:57ARIAnthony DuclairGWGAssists: Max Domi · Wrist, 0.26 xG1–3
- P3 7:47ANASami VatanenPPAssists: Cam Fowler, Ryan Getzlaf · Wrist, 0.18 xG2–3
- P3 18:54ARIAntoine VermetteENAssists: Brad Richardson · Wrist, 0.70 xG2–4
Penalties (8)
- P1 14:32ANAShawn Horcoff: Hooking2 min
- P2 3:41ANAShawn Horcoff: Cross checking2 min · PPG
- P2 5:17ANAJosh Manson: High sticking2 min
- P2 5:17ARIMartin Hanzal: High sticking2 min
- P2 9:26ARIKlas Dahlbeck: Tripping2 min
- P2 16:38ANARyan Getzlaf: Roughing2 min
- P2 19:39ARITobias Rieder: Tripping2 min · PPG
- P3 7:10ARINicklas Grossmann: Interference2 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 20:00Vermette won the faceoff against Horcoff
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- Getzlaf – Perry – Rakell14:10
xG 0.34–0.41 (45%)attempts 14–12goals 0–0
- Horcoff – Cogliano – Hagelin11:08
xG 0.27–0.39 (40%)attempts 9–10goals 0–0
- Santorelli – Stewart – Maroon5:43
xG 0.20–0.39 (34%)attempts 8–5goals 0–2
- Kesler – Silfverberg – Ritchie9:37
xG 0.26–0.46 (37%)attempts 6–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Vatanen – Lindholm2:25
xG 0.07–0.06 (51%)attempts 3–1goals 0–0
- Manson – Lindholm13:08
xG 0.29–0.36 (44%)attempts 12–8goals 0–0
- Stoner – Vatanen13:00
xG 0.39–0.58 (41%)attempts 11–14goals 0–0
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestVermette – Richardson – Martinook10:56
xG 0.62–0.20 (76%)attempts 12–7goals 0–0
- Jeffrey – Duclair – Domi10:13
xG 0.65–0.29 (69%)attempts 12–6goals 1–0
- Hanzal – Boedker – Rieder11:48
xG 0.46–0.22 (67%)attempts 9–9goals 0–0
- Gordon – Chipchura – Cunningham8:05
xG 0.32–0.25 (57%)attempts 9–10goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestMichalek – Dahlbeck11:51
xG 0.89–0.27 (76%)attempts 16–9goals 1–0
- Stone – Ekman-Larsson18:10
xG 0.76–0.45 (63%)attempts 19–15goals 1–0
- Grossmann – Murphy15:12
xG 0.47–0.46 (51%)attempts 9–15goals 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.
ARI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ARI is favoured, below it ANA. 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, Arizona Coyotes win this game 85% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ARI − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).