Fri, Mar 18, 2016·Honda Center, Anaheim
Boston Bruins 0, Anaheim Ducks 4
Three stars
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Anaheim Ducks win this game 57% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BOS | 011 | 016 | 011 | 038 |
| ANA | 210 | 010 | 26 | 426 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 2:51ANAJamie McGinnGWGAssists: Corey Perry, Ryan Getzlaf · Deflected, 0.12 xG0–1
- P1 4:07ANARyan KeslerAssists: Andrew Cogliano, Jakob Silfverberg · Wrist, 0.26 xG0–2
- P3 0:58ANAHampus LindholmAssists: Ryan Getzlaf · Slap, 0.06 xG0–3
- P3 14:28ANARickard RakellAssists: David Perron, Hampus Lindholm · Slap, 0.05 xG0–4
Penalties (8)
- P1 9:18ANAHampus Lindholm: Slashing2 min
- P1 12:55BOSZdeno Chara: Interference2 min
- P1 15:01ANADavid Perron: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 9:42BOSDavid Pastrnak: Tripping2 min
- P2 0:00BOSBrad Marchand: Roughing2 min
- P2 0:00ANADavid Perron: Unsportsmanlike conduct2 min
- P3 7:26BOSZdeno Chara: Fighting5 min
- P3 7:26ANAClayton Stoner: Fighting5 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 Bergeron
- 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.
Boston Bruins
Forward lines
- bestEriksson – Krejci – Pastrnak13:15
xG 0.66–0.13 (83%)attempts 19–6goals 0–0
- Ferraro – Randell – Acciari10:26
xG 0.67–0.20 (77%)attempts 13–4goals 0–0
- Bergeron – Stempniak – Marchand10:35
xG 0.50–0.74 (40%)attempts 13–13goals 0–1
- Beleskey – Spooner – Connolly9:28
xG 0.25–0.69 (27%)attempts 8–11goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestMcQuaid – Krug11:35
xG 0.79–0.61 (56%)attempts 12–10goals 0–1
- Chara – Miller13:06
xG 0.51–0.37 (58%)attempts 19–8goals 0–0
- Liles – Seidenberg14:46
xG 0.79–1.05 (43%)attempts 19–16goals 0–2
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestKesler – Cogliano – Silfverberg10:36
xG 0.77–0.53 (59%)attempts 12–12goals 1–0
- Horcoff – Garbutt – Ritchie8:26
xG 0.20–0.14 (59%)attempts 5–4goals 0–0
- Perron – Pirri – Rakell11:55
xG 0.62–0.62 (50%)attempts 11–16goals 0–0
- Getzlaf – Perry – McGinn12:30
xG 0.62–0.64 (49%)attempts 9–19goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestManson – Lindholm12:17
xG 0.89–0.45 (66%)attempts 13–13goals 1–0
- Despres – Fowler15:30
xG 0.80–0.53 (60%)attempts 14–19goals 1–0
- Bieksa – Fowler2:03
xG 0.09–0.20 (31%)attempts 2–5goals 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 BOS. 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 57% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (ANA − BOS), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).