Wed, Mar 16, 2016·Honda Center, Anaheim
New York Rangers 2, Anaheim Ducks 1
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, New York Rangers win this game 73% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NYR | 04 | 19 | 110 | 223 |
| ANA | 15 | 07 | 011 | 123 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 14:03ANAJamie McGinnAssists: Corey Perry · Slap, 0.16 xG0–1
- P2 3:11NYRKevin KleinAssists: Tanner Glass, Dominic Moore · Slap, 0.04 xG1–1
- P3 13:19NYRKevin KleinGWGAssists: J.T. Miller, Eric Staal · Tip-in, 0.15 xG2–1
Penalties (3)
- P1 14:31ANAClayton Stoner: Tripping2 min
- P2 4:33ANARyan Getzlaf: Slashing2 min
- P3 16:52ANADavid Perron: Boarding2 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 20:00Rakell won the faceoff against Stepan
- 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.
New York Rangers
Forward lines
- bestStepan – Kreider – Fast10:07
xG 0.61–0.26 (70%)attempts 10–5goals 0–1
- Staal – Hayes – Miller13:48
xG 0.28–0.20 (59%)attempts 7–10goals 1–0
- Nash – Brassard – Zuccarello13:39
xG 0.49–0.45 (52%)attempts 9–17goals 0–0
- Moore – Glass – Stalberg10:27
xG 0.11–0.11 (52%)attempts 4–12goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestKlein – McDonagh15:53
xG 0.76–0.28 (73%)attempts 11–11goals 2–0
- Boyle – Staal14:02
xG 0.61–0.30 (67%)attempts 11–11goals 0–0
- Klein – Staal3:29
xG 0.00–0.04 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- Kesler – Cogliano – Silfverberg13:30
xG 0.51–0.49 (51%)attempts 19–8goals 0–0
- Horcoff – Garbutt – Ritchie7:04
xG 0.05–0.04 (54%)attempts 6–2goals 0–1
- Getzlaf – Perron – Pirri13:29
xG 0.17–0.21 (46%)attempts 9–11goals 0–0
- Perry – McGinn – Rakell14:14
xG 0.50–0.78 (39%)attempts 12–9goals 1–1
Defence pairs
- bestStoner – Manson11:16
xG 0.36–0.11 (77%)attempts 10–5goals 1–0
- Manson – Lindholm5:00
xG 0.11–0.04 (73%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Stoner – Despres2:00
xG 0.07–0.02 (77%)attempts 3–1goals 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.
ANA's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line ANA is favoured, below it NYR. 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, New York Rangers win this game 73% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − NYR), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).