Thu, Feb 4, 2016·Scottrade Center, St. Louis
San Jose Sharks 3, St. Louis Blues 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, San Jose Sharks win this game 60% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SJS | 016 | 210 | 16 | 332 |
| STL | 013 | 16 | 08 | 127 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 3:55SJSJoonas DonskoiAssists: Joe Pavelski · Wrist, 0.05 xG1–0
- P2 7:15SJSJoe ThorntonGWGAssists: Joe Pavelski, Marc-Edouard Vlasic · Slap, 0.07 xG2–0
- P2 16:54STLJay BouwmeesterAssists: Alex Pietrangelo, Paul Stastny · Slap, 0.02 xG2–1
- P3 16:44SJSMatt NietoUnassisted · Backhand, 0.12 xG3–1
Penalties (9)
- P1 1:06SJSJustin Braun: Slashing2 min
- P1 8:48STLJoel Edmundson: Cross checking2 min
- P1 12:51SJSBrent Burns: Hooking2 min
- P1 13:43STLDavid Backes: Slashing2 min
- P2 5:09STLJori Lehtera: Hooking2 min
- P2 6:33SJSBrent Burns: Tripping2 min
- P2 6:49STLVladimir Tarasenko: Tripping2 min
- P2 13:12STLScottie Upshall: Roughing2 min
- P2 13:12SJSJoel Ward: Roughing2 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 20:00Pavelski won the faceoff against Steen
- 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.
San Jose Sharks
Forward lines
- bestMarleau – Ward – Nieto8:09
xG 0.70–0.18 (80%)attempts 11–9goals 1–0
- Zubrus – Tierney – Karlsson6:53
xG 0.26–0.12 (68%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Couture – Wingels – Donskoi8:14
xG 0.24–0.21 (54%)attempts 7–7goals 0–0
- Thornton – Pavelski – Hertl11:07
xG 0.47–0.44 (51%)attempts 9–14goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestVlasic – Braun11:39
xG 0.45–0.00 (100%)attempts 9–6goals 0–0
- Martin – Burns12:10
xG 0.84–0.56 (60%)attempts 14–11goals 2–1
- Braun – Dillon2:20
xG 0.15–0.12 (56%)attempts 4–2goals 0–0
St. Louis Blues
Forward lines
- bestStastny – Berglund – Tarasenko7:26
xG 0.36–0.08 (82%)attempts 8–4goals 1–0
- Stastny – Paajarvi – Tarasenko5:10
xG 0.33–0.08 (80%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Steen – Backes – Berglund5:26
xG 0.46–0.31 (59%)attempts 9–5goals 0–0
- Upshall – Steen – Backes4:55
xG 0.08–0.11 (42%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestGunnarsson – Parayko10:03
xG 0.44–0.25 (64%)attempts 11–7goals 0–0
- Shattenkirk – Parayko3:45
xG 0.00–0.26 (0%)attempts 1–4goals 0–1
- Shattenkirk – Edmundson9:10
xG 0.12–0.44 (21%)attempts 10–10goals 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.
STL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line STL is favoured, below it SJS. 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, San Jose Sharks win this game 60% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (STL − SJS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).