Wed, Mar 9, 2016·Pepsi Center, Denver
Anaheim Ducks 0, Colorado Avalanche 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 75% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 012 | 013 | 012 | 037 |
| COL | 110 | 210 | 06 | 326 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 10:54COLNathan MacKinnonGWGAssists: Erik Johnson, Mikkel Boedker · Wrist, 0.12 xG0–1
- P2 17:19COLAndreas MartinsenAssists: Matt Duchene, Francois Beauchemin · Backhand, 0.11 xG0–2
- P2 19:31COLShawn MatthiasAssists: Carl Soderberg, Nick Holden · Wrist, 0.16 xG0–3
Penalties (9)
- P1 9:16COLCody McLeod: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P1 9:16ANACorey Perry: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P1 18:34COLCarl Soderberg: Cross checking2 min
- P2 0:25COLErik Johnson: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P2 3:38COLZach Redmond: High sticking2 min
- P3 11:40ANADavid Perron: Hooking2 min
- P3 13:20ANAHampus Lindholm: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P3 19:55ANAJamie McGinn: Roughing2 min
- P3 19:55COLFrancois Beauchemin: 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 20:00Kesler won the faceoff against Soderberg
- 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
- bestKesler – Cogliano – Silfverberg8:30
xG 1.39–0.09 (94%)attempts 16–3goals 0–0
- Thompson – Santorelli – Garbutt5:35
xG 0.36–0.02 (94%)attempts 10–3goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Perron – Ritchie7:10
xG 0.32–0.22 (59%)attempts 11–8goals 0–1
- Santorelli – McGinn – Rakell3:11
xG 0.09–0.06 (58%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestManson – Lindholm8:55
xG 1.33–0.09 (94%)attempts 16–3goals 0–0
- Despres – Fowler5:30
xG 0.39–0.08 (82%)attempts 7–5goals 0–0
- Despres – Vatanen3:05
xG 0.30–0.01 (96%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
Colorado Avalanche
Forward lines
- Comeau – Boedker – MacKinnon12:23
xG 0.09–0.11 (43%)attempts 4–6goals 0–0
- Soderberg – Matthias – Landeskog11:17
xG 0.32–0.47 (41%)attempts 9–14goals 1–0
- Mitchell – McLeod – Martinsen9:26
xG 0.23–0.67 (25%)attempts 9–10goals 0–0
- Iginla – Duchene – Grigorenko10:23
xG 0.27–1.37 (16%)attempts 7–24goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Beauchemin – Johnson16:19
xG 0.30–0.36 (46%)attempts 12–14goals 0–0
- Barrie – Gelinas2:15
xG 0.00–0.06 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
- Redmond – Gelinas10:52
xG 0.09–0.83 (10%)attempts 3–17goals 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.
COL's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line COL 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, Anaheim Ducks win this game 75% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (COL − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).