Thu, Mar 24, 2016·CONSOL Energy Center, Pittsburgh
New Jersey Devils 3, Pittsburgh Penguins 0
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 78% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NJD | 211 | 07 | 16 | 324 |
| PIT | 014 | 010 | 015 | 039 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 0:26NJDKyle PalmieriGWGAssists: Travis Zajac, Reid Boucher · Wrist, 0.05 xG1–0
- P1 13:08NJDKyle PalmieriPPAssists: Damon Severson, Reid Boucher · Slap, 0.09 xG2–0
- P3 9:57NJDAdam HenriqueAssists: Damon Severson, Devante Smith-Pelly · Wrist, 0.05 xG3–0
Penalties (6)
- P1 2:13NJDStephen Gionta: Slashing2 min
- P1 13:00PITBeau Bennett: Holding2 min · PPG
- P1 15:28NJDBobby Farnham: Cross checking2 min
- P2 11:24NJDJohn Moore: High sticking2 min
- P2 13:30PITJustin Schultz: Hooking2 min
- P3 3:01PITKris Letang: Hooking2 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 20:00Crosby won the faceoff against Zajac
- 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 Jersey Devils
Forward lines
- Ruutu – Gionta – Farnham7:37
xG 0.18–0.15 (55%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
- Sislo – Pietila – Kalinin7:33
xG 0.44–0.48 (48%)attempts 7–10goals 0–0
- Zajac – Palmieri – Boucher10:48
xG 0.13–0.44 (23%)attempts 5–10goals 1–0
- Henrique – Smith-Pelly – Blandisi10:15
xG 0.17–0.56 (23%)attempts 4–15goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- Greene – Larsson18:34
xG 0.38–0.66 (36%)attempts 10–18goals 1–0
- Warsofsky – Mozik10:48
xG 0.12–0.58 (17%)attempts 8–14goals 0–0
- Moore – Severson11:48
xG 0.19–0.83 (19%)attempts 4–17goals 1–0
Pittsburgh Penguins
Forward lines
- bestCrosby – Hornqvist – Hagelin8:51
xG 0.63–0.01 (98%)attempts 13–1goals 0–0
- Kessel – Bonino – Hagelin5:38
xG 0.30–0.04 (90%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Fehr – Bennett – Sheary3:51
xG 0.38–0.16 (70%)attempts 6–2goals 0–1
- Kunitz – Kessel – Bonino7:31
xG 0.30–0.12 (72%)attempts 14–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestLetang – Maatta15:52
xG 1.11–0.16 (87%)attempts 26–8goals 0–1
- Cole – Schultz8:45
xG 0.49–0.09 (85%)attempts 8–5goals 0–0
- Cole – Dumoulin2:25
xG 0.00–0.02 (0%)attempts 0–1goals 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.
PIT's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line PIT is favoured, below it NJD. 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, Pittsburgh Penguins win this game 78% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (PIT − NJD), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).