Thu, Apr 7, 2016·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Arizona Coyotes 2, Nashville Predators 3 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 85% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARI | 14 | 17 | 07 | 00 | 218 |
| NSH | 08 | 010 | 212 | 11 | 331 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P1 6:26ARIAntoine VermetteAssists: Zbynek Michalek, Oliver Ekman-Larsson · Tip-in, 0.21 xG1–0
- P2 9:42ARIShane DoanAssists: Brad Richardson, Oliver Ekman-Larsson · Slap, 0.07 xG2–0
- P3 7:26NSHShea WeberPPAssists: Craig Smith, Filip Forsberg · Snap, 0.09 xG2–1
- P3 19:41NSHFilip ForsbergAssists: Roman Josi, Ryan Johansen · Tip-in, 0.15 xG2–2
- OT 0:20NSHRoman JosiGWGAssists: James Neal, Ryan Johansen · Wrist, 0.01 xG2–3
Penalties (9)
- P1 11:30NSHRyan Johansen: Slashing2 min
- P1 11:30ARIKevin Connauton: Holding2 min
- P1 16:03ARIKyle Chipchura: Hooking2 min
- P2 5:35NSHCalle Jarnkrok: Interference2 min
- P2 6:00ARIOliver Ekman-Larsson: Interference2 min
- P2 10:17ARIKevin Connauton: Interference2 min
- P2 12:33NSHFilip Forsberg: Hooking2 min
- P3 7:13ARIConnor Murphy: Elbowing2 min · PPG
- P3 9:48ARIMike Smith: Delaying game puck over glass2 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 20:00Gaustad won the faceoff against Vermette
- 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.
Arizona Coyotes
Forward lines
- bestMartinook – Dauphin – Sekac4:46
xG 0.20–0.02 (91%)attempts 3–2goals 0–0
- Rieder – Dauphin – Sekac4:00
xG 0.00–0.05 (0%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Gordon – Chipchura – Martinook3:58
xG 0.07–0.18 (27%)attempts 2–4goals 0–0
- Gordon – Chipchura – Rieder3:22
xG 0.11–0.23 (33%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- Michalek – Dahlbeck6:02
xG 0.09–0.16 (37%)attempts 5–3goals 0–0
- Grant – Dahlbeck5:08
xG 0.06–0.13 (30%)attempts 6–2goals 0–0
- Michalek – Connauton6:03
xG 0.01–0.18 (7%)attempts 1–5goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestRibeiro – Smith – Forsberg11:44
xG 0.71–0.08 (90%)attempts 15–4goals 0–1
- Fisher – Wilson – Arvidsson10:05
xG 0.67–0.27 (71%)attempts 9–2goals 0–1
- Gaustad – Bass – Sissons6:27
xG 0.18–0.13 (58%)attempts 4–8goals 0–0
- Neal – Jarnkrok – Johansen10:11
xG 0.20–0.26 (45%)attempts 5–6goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestWeber – Josi19:10
xG 1.12–0.17 (87%)attempts 19–8goals 0–0
- Ekholm – Granberg11:25
xG 0.90–0.36 (72%)attempts 11–7goals 0–1
- Ellis – Ekholm3:00
xG 0.28–0.00 (100%)attempts 7–0goals 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.
NSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NSH is favoured, below it ARI. 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, Nashville Predators win this game 85% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − ARI), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).