Thu, Dec 17, 2015·United Center, Chicago
Edmonton Oilers 0, Chicago Blackhawks 4
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 61% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EDM | 09 | 015 | 09 | 033 |
| CHI | 114 | 116 | 27 | 437 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 14:00CHIJonathan ToewsGWGAssists: Marian Hossa, Teuvo Teravainen · Snap, 0.11 xG0–1
- P2 12:29CHITeuvo TeravainenAssists: Jonathan Toews, Marian Hossa · Snap, 0.13 xG0–2
- P3 16:42CHITeuvo TeravainenAssists: Marian Hossa, Jonathan Toews · Backhand, 0.25 xG0–3
- P3 18:35CHIArtemi PanarinAssists: Brent Seabrook, Patrick Kane · Wrist, 0.07 xG0–4
Penalties (2)
- P2 1:54EDMNikita Nikitin: Holding2 min
- P2 17:56EDMNikita Nikitin: 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 20:00Anisimov won the faceoff against Hendricks
- 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.
Edmonton Oilers
Forward lines
- bestHendricks – Korpikoski – Letestu13:54
xG 0.64–0.12 (84%)attempts 15–5goals 0–0
- Gazdic – Lander – Pakarinen4:50
xG 0.31–0.12 (72%)attempts 3–6goals 0–0
- Eberle – Pakarinen – Draisaitl4:41
xG 0.12–0.01 (95%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Purcell – Hall – Nugent-Hopkins3:53
xG 0.04–0.20 (16%)attempts 3–2goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestGryba – Davidson16:02
xG 0.70–0.44 (61%)attempts 17–15goals 0–0
- Sekera – Nurse20:33
xG 0.42–0.45 (48%)attempts 14–18goals 0–1
- Nikitin – Schultz14:46
xG 0.59–0.79 (43%)attempts 16–11goals 0–2
Chicago Blackhawks
Forward lines
- bestHossa – Toews – Teravainen13:33
xG 0.78–0.08 (91%)attempts 12–7goals 3–0
- Desjardins – Kruger – Garbutt3:05
xG 0.27–0.17 (61%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Bickell – Shaw – Rasmussen11:48
xG 0.11–0.23 (31%)attempts 7–11goals 0–0
- Desjardins – Garbutt – Shaw3:23
xG 0.04–0.21 (18%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestSeabrook – Hjalmarsson17:52
xG 0.81–0.17 (82%)attempts 20–10goals 2–0
- Keith – van Riemsdyk15:48
xG 0.72–0.54 (57%)attempts 15–16goals 1–0
- Keith – Seabrook3:39
xG 0.13–0.21 (39%)attempts 4–3goals 1–0
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.
CHI's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CHI is favoured, below it EDM. 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, Chicago Blackhawks win this game 61% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CHI − EDM), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).