Sat, Mar 26, 2016·First Niagara Center, Buffalo
Winnipeg Jets 2, Buffalo Sabres 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Buffalo Sabres win this game 80% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WPG | 26 | 09 | 05 | 220 |
| BUF | 110 | 010 | 29 | 329 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 4:27WPGNikolaj EhlersAssists: Mark Scheifele, Blake Wheeler · Snap, 0.13 xG1–0
- P1 5:09WPGAndrew CoppUnassisted · Deflected, 0.26 xG2–0
- P1 8:37BUFHudson FaschingAssists: Mark Pysyk, Casey Nelson · Wrist, 0.24 xG2–1
- P3 1:23BUFSam ReinhartAssists: Zemgus Girgensons · Wrist, 0.32 xG2–2
- P3 4:07BUFJack EichelGWGAssists: Sam Reinhart · Snap, 0.06 xG2–3
Penalties (3)
- P2 4:06BUFEvander Kane: Tripping2 min
- P2 13:44WPGDustin Byfuglien: Hooking2 min
- P2 15:58WPGMark Stuart: Tripping2 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 20:00O'Reilly won the faceoff against Burmistrov
- 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.
Winnipeg Jets
Forward lines
- bestCopp – Dano – Petan3:15
xG 0.51–0.02 (95%)attempts 5–2goals 1–0
- Stafford – Burmistrov – Petan9:54
xG 0.04–0.07 (36%)attempts 6–2goals 0–1
- Wheeler – Scheifele – Ehlers13:11
xG 0.47–0.55 (46%)attempts 10–17goals 1–0
- Armia – Copp – Dano5:13
xG 0.35–0.50 (41%)attempts 5–8goals 0–1
Defence pairs
- bestPostma – Melchiori10:31
xG 0.29–0.03 (91%)attempts 9–4goals 1–0
- Byfuglien – Trouba3:43
xG 0.00–0.17 (0%)attempts 0–5goals 0–0
- Byfuglien – Chiarot18:13
xG 0.61–0.83 (42%)attempts 16–27goals 0–0
Buffalo Sabres
Forward lines
- bestGirgensons – Reinhart – Eichel10:55
xG 0.97–0.02 (98%)attempts 14–4goals 2–0
- Legwand – Moulson – Fasching4:17
xG 0.28–0.01 (97%)attempts 6–1goals 1–0
- O'Reilly – Kane – Deslauriers7:17
xG 0.20–0.17 (53%)attempts 7–8goals 0–0
- O'Reilly – Kane – Fasching5:56
xG 0.06–0.04 (60%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestPysyk – Nelson14:14
xG 1.03–0.62 (63%)attempts 16–7goals 2–1
- Gorges – Ristolainen17:01
xG 0.46–0.39 (54%)attempts 15–11goals 0–0
- Bogosian – McCabe18:28
xG 0.30–0.51 (37%)attempts 16–16goals 0–1
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.
BUF's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line BUF is favoured, below it WPG. 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, Buffalo Sabres win this game 80% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (BUF − WPG), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).