Sat, Jan 9, 2016·Rogers Arena, Vancouver
Tampa Bay Lightning 3, Vancouver Canucks 2 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Tampa Bay Lightning win this game 70% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBL | 16 | 09 | 117 | 13 | 335 |
| VAN | 18 | 07 | 15 | 03 | 223 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 3:41TBLAlex KillornAssists: Nikita Kucherov, Vladislav Namestnikov · Wrist, 0.08 xG1–0
- P1 15:24VANSven BaertschiPPAssists: Bo Horvat, Yannick Weber · Backhand, 0.13 xG1–1
- P3 12:20TBLValtteri FilppulaAssists: Anton Stralman, Ryan Callahan · Wrist, 0.05 xG2–1
- P3 17:10VANBo HorvatAssists: Ben Hutton, Alex Biega · Wrist, 0.02 xG2–2
- OT 3:51TBLNikita KucherovGWGAssists: Vladislav Namestnikov, Anton Stralman · Wrist, 0.11 xG3–2
Penalties (5)
- P1 9:21TBLRyan Callahan: Holding2 min
- P1 14:12TBLAlex Killorn: Hooking2 min · PPG
- P2 4:03VANAlexander Edler: High sticking double minor4 min
- P2 8:59VANAlexander Edler: Interference2 min
- P3 10:19VANYannick Weber: Cross checking2 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 Sedin
- 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.
Tampa Bay Lightning
Forward lines
- bestFilppula – Callahan – Paquette8:48
xG 0.53–0.08 (87%)attempts 13–5goals 0–1
- Stamkos – Palat – Namestnikov11:16
xG 0.26–0.10 (71%)attempts 9–3goals 0–0
- Killorn – Johnson – Kucherov11:32
xG 0.14–0.00 (100%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Boyle – Condra – Brown6:24
xG 0.40–0.29 (58%)attempts 6–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestStralman – Hedman13:02
xG 0.28–0.02 (95%)attempts 8–2goals 0–0
- Coburn – Hedman4:17
xG 0.28–0.03 (90%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
- Coburn – Nesterov6:12
xG 0.29–0.08 (79%)attempts 7–3goals 0–0
Vancouver Canucks
Forward lines
- bestHiggins – Vey – Virtanen7:11
xG 0.17–0.09 (66%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Sedin – Sedin – Dorsett2:00
xG 0.00–0.00attempts 1–0goals 0–0
- Prust – Cracknell – Dorsett11:05
xG 0.35–0.43 (45%)attempts 8–11goals 0–1
- Vrbata – Baertschi – Horvat9:15
xG 0.23–0.32 (42%)attempts 9–10goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- Biega – Bartkowski12:43
xG 0.33–0.47 (41%)attempts 11–11goals 0–0
- Edler – Tanev16:06
xG 0.12–0.33 (27%)attempts 7–10goals 0–0
- Weber – Hutton11:11
xG 0.30–0.63 (32%)attempts 7–13goals 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.
VAN's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line VAN is favoured, below it TBL. 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 70% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (VAN − TBL), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).